[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20070309104706.53ea82ba.khali@linux-fr.org>
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2007 10:47:06 +0100
From: Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>
To: "Sonic Zhang" <sonic.adi@...il.com>
Cc: "Bryan Wu" <bryan.wu@...log.com>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"Alexey Dobriyan" <adobriyan@...il.com>,
"Mike Frysinger" <vapier.adi@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mhfan@...c.edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH -mm] Blackfin: blackfin i2c driver
On Fri, 9 Mar 2007 12:04:59 +0800, Sonic Zhang wrote:
> On 3/8/07, Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org> wrote:
> > i2c-core can emulate SMBus transactions using master_xfer, so in
> > general when you have a complete master_xfer implementation you do not
> > need to define a separate smbus_xfer function. This would save a lot of
> > code.
>
> Actually the i2c-core can't emulate SMBus transactions using the
> master_xfer function, because the blackfin TWI controller provide
> hardware support to the SMBus transactions and the combination of
> master_xfer operations can't generate proper signal for SMBus.
Did you try? I can't think of any valid reason why it wouldn't work.
All SMBus transactions are compatible with I2C by definition.
Now performance might be better with dedicated code if the hardware
accelerate SMBus transactions, that's a different issue. If you prefer
to keep the smbus_xfer method for performance reasons, that's OK with
me. After all you're the one who will have to maintain the driver ;)
--
Jean Delvare
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists