From owner-freebsd-embedded@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 8 16:49:36 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-embedded@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 493C7106566B for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 16:49:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Received: from harmony.bsdimp.com (bsdimp.com [199.45.160.85]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 095E48FC18 for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 16:49:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by harmony.bsdimp.com (8.14.3/8.14.1) with ESMTP id oA8Ggnu9009839 for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2010 09:42:49 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com) Message-ID: <4CD82889.3020602@bsdimp.com> Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 09:42:49 -0700 From: Warner Losh User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100918 Thunderbird/3.1.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-embedded@FreeBSD.org References: <4C0BB887.5070103@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Subject: Re: Review request: iicbus_transfer_gen() repeated start support X-BeenThere: freebsd-embedded@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Dedicated and Embedded Systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 16:49:36 -0000 On 11/07/2010 20:37, Andrew Thompson wrote: > On 7 June 2010 03:02, Nathan Whitehorn wrote: >> I committed yesterday some changes to the iicbus_transfer() API that allow >> using that interface to send messages containing repeated starts. The >> attached patch implements this for the iicbus_transfer_gen() case, but I >> don't have any I2C controllers that use this routine, so I can't test it. I >> would much appreciate it if someone could review and test the patch for me. >> -Nathan > I have tested this and nothing broke. The i2c devices+drivers on my > board do not use IIC_M_NOSTART or IIC_M_NOSTOP flags so couldn't > verify that part of it. I'll have to try things on my AT91 box too. Do the upper layers need to warn about IIC_M_NOSTART/IIC_M_NOSTOP flags not being supported? Or have some way for userland to know they can issue the ioctl? Warner