From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jongsun.han@samsung.com (Jongsun Han) Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 19:19:43 +0900 Subject: [PATCH 7/7] ARM: S5PC210: I2C{3, 4, 5, 6, 7} device support In-Reply-To: References: <20100930044859.GA16923@july> <000b01cb6067$99850240$cc8f06c0$%seo@samsung.com> <006601cb6081$bf8a7140$3e9f53c0$%han@samsung.com> Message-ID: <006b01cb6088$ffc17b80$ff447280$%han@samsung.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 6:27 PM, Jongsun Han > wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Jassi Brar > wrote: > >> > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Kyungmin Park > wrote: > >> >> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 3:20 PM, Jeongbae Seo > > >> wrote: > >> >>> Kyungmin wrote: > >> >>>> From: Kyungmin Park > >> >>>> > >> >>>> S5PC210 support more I2C devices than previous SoCs. > >> >>>> And to prevent the wrong usage use the s5p prefix instead of s3c. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park > >> >>>> --- > >> >>>> ?arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/Kconfig ? ? ? ? ? ?| ? 15 +++++++ > >> >>>> ?arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/Makefile ? ? ? ? ? | ? ?5 ++ > >> >>>> ?arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/setup-i2c3.c ? ? ? | ? 25 +++++++++++ > >> >>>> ?arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/setup-i2c4.c ? ? ? | ? 25 +++++++++++ > >> >>>> ?arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/setup-i2c5.c ? ? ? | ? 25 +++++++++++ > >> >>>> ?arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/setup-i2c6.c ? ? ? | ? 25 +++++++++++ > >> >>>> ?arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/setup-i2c7.c ? ? ? | ? 25 +++++++++++ > >> >>>> ?arch/arm/plat-s5p/Kconfig ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?| ? 25 +++++++++++ > >> >>>> ?arch/arm/plat-s5p/Makefile ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? ?5 ++ > >> >>>> ?arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-i2c3.c ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? 67 > >> >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> >>>> ?arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-i2c4.c ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? 67 > >> >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> >>>> ?arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-i2c5.c ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? 67 > >> >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> >>>> ?arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-i2c6.c ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? 67 > >> >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> >>>> ?arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-i2c7.c ? ? ? ? ? ? | ? 67 > >> >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >> >>>> ?arch/arm/plat-samsung/include/plat/iic.h | ? ?5 ++ > >> >>>> ?15 files changed, 515 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > >> >>>> ?create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/setup-i2c3.c > >> >>>> ?create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/setup-i2c4.c > >> >>>> ?create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/setup-i2c5.c > >> >>>> ?create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/setup-i2c6.c > >> >>>> ?create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-s5pv310/setup-i2c7.c > >> >>>> ?create mode 100644 arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-i2c3.c > >> >>>> ?create mode 100644 arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-i2c4.c > >> >>>> ?create mode 100644 arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-i2c5.c > >> >>>> ?create mode 100644 arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-i2c6.c > >> >>>> ?create mode 100644 arch/arm/plat-s5p/dev-i2c7.c > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> >>> Hi Kyungmin, > >> >>> > >> >>> We are considering another way not to make additional new i2c dev > files. > >> >>> In my opinion, this patch looks not bad but we'd better make an > effort to > >> >>> avoid having the more similar file. > >> >> > >> >> Actually I also it's not good approach, but as there's no comment or > >> >> discuss about this I send the patches. > >> >> http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2010- > >> August/022615.html > >> >> > >> >> If you have good method or approaches, I'm welcome. > >> > > >> > First, these are device definitions and gpio set callbacks and > >> > shouldn't take much > >> > of space. So, perhaps these all could be built upon single I2C > support > >> > selection. > >> > >> That's my first propose. > > > > Hi, Kyungmin and Jassi > > > > I think that parts of i2c in S5PV310 aren't used depending on the usage > of > > S5PV310. > > It's better define the number of i2c devs being used instead of using > single I2C > > support selection. > > Can you tell me in detail? I don't know what do you mean? > and FYI, universal board uses all I2Cs except I2C2. > For example, If i2c(0..4) except 2 are used in S5PV310, set the number of i2c dev as 5. Then only i2c(0..4) are built without building i2c(5..7). > > > >> > > >> > Second, if we must build them conditionally, how about having all in > >> > one file with > >> > each device's definition and callback surrounded by corresponding > ifdef ? > >> > That would alteast save us file-count. > >> > >> This method is also no problem if all of person are agreed. > >> > >> So just choose it and make a conclusion. > >> > >> Thank you, > >> Kyungmin Park > >> > > > > > I agree with Jassi's opinion keeping setup-i2c(0..2) and dev-i2c(0..2) > for > > backward compatibility and > > Of course it should be. and there's no code to brake the existing codes. > > > adding a file which handles i2c(0..7) for S5PV310 and coming > > Samsung > > soc. > > Do you mean create the new i2c[0-7] for s5pv310? > I think it's better to give some example how to implement as your word. > set-i2c.c in S5PV310 machine directory sets all i2c related gpio. dev-i2c.c which is created in plat directory sets all i2c devs plat data. > > > > Best Regards > > Jongsun Han > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel