[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <A6D19A13FE030A409EC4362C172E091F0E30CDB5@eseldmw101.eemea.ericsson.se>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 21:37:04 +0100
From: "Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>
To: "Srinidhi KASAGAR" <srinidhi.kasagar@...ricsson.com>,
<linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>
Cc: <ben-linux@...ff.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<STEricsson_nomadik_linux@...t.st.com>, <sachin.verma@...com>,
<andrea.gallo@...ricsson.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/2] i2c: Add support for Ux500/Nomadik I2C controller
Hi Srinidhi, great work!
Just a few quickies, if you fix these it's
Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-nomadik/include/plat/i2c.h
> b/arch/arm/plat-nomadik/include/plat/i2c.h
> +enum i2c_freq_mode {
> + I2C_FREQ_MODE_STANDARD, /* up to 100 Kb/s */
> + I2C_FREQ_MODE_FAST, /* up to 400 Kb/s */
> + I2C_FREQ_MODE_FAST_PLUS, /* up to 1 Mb/s */
> + I2C_FREQ_MODE_HIGH_SPEED /* up to 3.4 Mb/s */
> +};
> +
> +enum i2c_addr_mode {
> + I2C_7_BIT_ADDRESS = 0x1,
> + I2C_10_BIT_ADDRESS = 0x2
> +};
Which field in the struct will use this? Can't
I2C_FUNC_10BIT_ADDR and I2C_M_TEN from include/linux/i2c.h (and
siblings) be used for this instead? Leftover?
You have this later:
(...)
+ if (unlikely(msgs[i].flags & I2C_M_TEN)) {
+ dev_err(&dev->pdev->dev, "10 bit addressing"
+ "not supported\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
(...)
Hmmmm?
> +
> +struct nmk_i2c_controller {
Please use kerneldoc for these comments.
(see Documentation/kernel-doc-nano-HOWTO.txt)
> + unsigned long clk_freq;
> + unsigned short slsu; /* slave data set up time */
Comment which unit this is in. (Nanosecs I think?)
> + unsigned char tft; /* Tx FIFO Threshold */
> + unsigned char rft; /* Rx FIFO Threshold */
In bytes?
> + unsigned short sm; /* speed mode */
Shouldn't this last element be
enum i2c_freq_mode sm
then?
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-nmk.c
(...)
> + dev->irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
> + ret = request_irq(dev->irq, i2c_irq_handler, IRQF_DISABLED,
> + DRIVER_NAME, dev);
Since I2C IRQs can be a bit tedious, could this be converted
to a request_threaded_irq()? OK I know that is probably a bit
intrusive and can very well be done later (so no blocker) but
think about it.
Linus Walleij
--
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