From: khali@linux-fr.org (Jean Delvare)
To: DI Dr Simon Vogl <simon@voxel.at>
Cc: sensors@Stimpy.netroedge.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: I2C parallel port adapters drivers
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 06:24:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031107223611.173c82cc.khali@linux-fr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3FAB6A8C.9070608@voxel.at>
> hi,
> sorry for the late answer.
No problem. After all, you're the first one to answer, too ;)
> you're right, the drivers are very similar, and typically you will
> only use one of them. It is of course possible to integrate them all
> into one physical module, which you are free to do :) This is more or
> less grounded on historic reasons far back in the development of the
> driver where I introduced the different hardware access
> implementations to accomodate the different implementations (and this
> went eventually into the kernel...).
>
> So I'd say, go ahead and code :)
OK, I'll write a unified driver then. Just one more question. Any reason
to prefer direct I/O access (ELV/Velleman) over parallel-port-style
programming (i2c-philips-par)? I'd say that the second is preferable,
but you might have had a reason to use direct access, that I ignore. If
not, I'll somehow use i2c-philips-par as a base for my unified driver,
which I'll probably call i2c-parport (since it won't be Philips-specific
anymore). That driver would support Philips adapters, ELV, Velleman and
ADM evaluation boards (I have one here for testing).
Thanks a lot for spending some time replying.
--
Jean Delvare
http://www.ensicaen.ismra.fr/~delvare/
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
To: DI Dr Simon Vogl <simon@voxel.at>
Cc: sensors@Stimpy.netroedge.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: I2C parallel port adapters drivers
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 22:36:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031107223611.173c82cc.khali@linux-fr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3FAB6A8C.9070608@voxel.at>
> hi,
> sorry for the late answer.
No problem. After all, you're the first one to answer, too ;)
> you're right, the drivers are very similar, and typically you will
> only use one of them. It is of course possible to integrate them all
> into one physical module, which you are free to do :) This is more or
> less grounded on historic reasons far back in the development of the
> driver where I introduced the different hardware access
> implementations to accomodate the different implementations (and this
> went eventually into the kernel...).
>
> So I'd say, go ahead and code :)
OK, I'll write a unified driver then. Just one more question. Any reason
to prefer direct I/O access (ELV/Velleman) over parallel-port-style
programming (i2c-philips-par)? I'd say that the second is preferable,
but you might have had a reason to use direct access, that I ignore. If
not, I'll somehow use i2c-philips-par as a base for my unified driver,
which I'll probably call i2c-parport (since it won't be Philips-specific
anymore). That driver would support Philips adapters, ELV, Velleman and
ADM evaluation boards (I have one here for testing).
Thanks a lot for spending some time replying.
--
Jean Delvare
http://www.ensicaen.ismra.fr/~delvare/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-05-19 6:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-11-02 12:23 I2C parallel port adapters drivers Jean Delvare
2005-05-19 6:24 ` Jean Delvare
2003-11-07 9:49 ` DI Dr Simon Vogl
2005-05-19 6:24 ` DI Dr Simon Vogl
2003-11-07 21:36 ` Jean Delvare [this message]
2005-05-19 6:24 ` Jean Delvare
2003-11-09 17:38 ` Dr. Simon Vogl
2005-05-19 6:24 ` Dr. Simon Vogl
2003-11-09 21:23 ` Jean Delvare
2005-05-19 6:24 ` Jean Delvare
2003-11-14 1:11 ` Greg KH
2005-05-19 6:24 ` Greg KH
2005-05-19 6:24 ` Mark Studebaker
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20031107223611.173c82cc.khali@linux-fr.org \
--to=khali@linux-fr.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sensors@Stimpy.netroedge.com \
--cc=simon@voxel.at \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.