From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-lf0-x242.google.com ([2a00:1450:4010:c07::242]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.89 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ek6X1-0000BO-Bt for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 09 Feb 2018 11:07:52 +0000 Received: by mail-lf0-x242.google.com with SMTP id u20so8479129lff.11 for ; Fri, 09 Feb 2018 03:07:40 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2018 14:22:24 +0300 From: Antony Pavlov Message-Id: <20180209142224.ba82057f3efc4a88a82fc2d8@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20180209083636.oipcpwnnflbqcdzb@pengutronix.de> References: <20180208074856.3701-1-antonynpavlov@gmail.com> <20180209083636.oipcpwnnflbqcdzb@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [RFC] commands: i2c_write: enable raw write to address To: Sascha Hauer Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org On Fri, 9 Feb 2018 09:36:36 +0100 Sascha Hauer wrote: > Hi Antony, > = > On Thu, Feb 08, 2018 at 10:48:56AM +0300, Antony Pavlov wrote: > > Sometimes for communication with a simple I2C devices > > (e.g. PCF8574 or TM1650) it's necessary to send only > > one data byte into the I2C device. > > Current i2c_write command makes this impossible because > > you can't just pass 'device address' and 'register number' > > (or 'device address' and 'one data byte') to the command. > > You always have to pass all three parameters: > > 'device address', 'register number' and 'data'. > > = > > This commit fixes the problem. > > = > > Sample usage: > > = > > barebox@barebox sandbox:/ i2c_write -a 0x24 0x01 > > = > > Signed-off-by: Antony Pavlov > > --- > > commands/i2c.c | 8 ++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > = > Looks good to me. > = > I applied this one despite the [RFC] tag. If for some reason you want to > resend this, feel free to do so, but otherwise consider this applied. Thanks! The patch is short, it's understandable and it fixes the problem. I prefere to apply this patch as is. I see some inconsistency in drivers/i2c/i2c.c. We have i2c_master_send() and i2c_write_reg() functions. These functions are intended to make similar work but they are written in very different style. I suppose that we can rewrite i2c_master_send() (e.g. drop FIXME) and make i2c_write_reg() work on top of i2c_master_send(). Any comments? -- = Best regards, =A0 Antony Pavlov _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox