From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:67c:670:201:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.89 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1elVoi-00054q-Ky for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 13 Feb 2018 08:19:58 +0000 Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2018 09:19:43 +0100 From: Sascha Hauer Message-ID: <20180213081943.cj2ty4e2u746ntja@pengutronix.de> References: <20180208074856.3701-1-antonynpavlov@gmail.com> <20180209083636.oipcpwnnflbqcdzb@pengutronix.de> <20180209142224.ba82057f3efc4a88a82fc2d8@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180209142224.ba82057f3efc4a88a82fc2d8@gmail.com> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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: Antony Pavlov Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 02:22:24PM +0300, Antony Pavlov wrote: > 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? Rewrite i2c_master_send()? Do you mean rewrite i2c_write_reg() instead? Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox