* [PATCH 0/7] ARM: S5PC210: I2C devices support and Universal board updates
@ 2010-10-05 8:40 ` Kukjin Kim
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Kukjin Kim @ 2010-10-05 8:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Kyungmin Park wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
Hi,
> I think we made some conclusion. first apply the current style and
> improve it later for consistency.
>
Yeah, we should decide for this.
However, it's expected following problem with current I2C style.
Suppose A board want to use only I2C0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 as I2C and B board want
to use all of I2C channels as I2C. If use one kernel image for A and B,
maybe selected all I2C channels. It can be happened the some problem about
I2C5 and I2C6 on A board when it used for other purpose.
Of course can happen regardless of number of I2C channel, but if more I2C
channels, the probability can be increased.
Anyway I know Mr. Han is preparing I2C patches for it and almost done.
How about continuing discussion for this after submitting it?
I think we have some time that talk about this issue.
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 0/7] ARM: S5PC210: I2C devices support and Universal board updates
2010-10-05 8:40 ` Kukjin Kim
@ 2010-10-05 8:46 ` Kyungmin Park
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Kyungmin Park @ 2010-10-05 8:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kukjin Kim; +Cc: linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, ben-linux
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote:
> Kyungmin Park wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
> Hi,
>
>> I think we made some conclusion. first apply the current style and
>> improve it later for consistency.
>>
> Yeah, we should decide for this.
>
> However, it's expected following problem with current I2C style.
>
> Suppose A board want to use only I2C0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 as I2C and B board want
> to use all of I2C channels as I2C. If use one kernel image for A and B,
> maybe selected all I2C channels. It can be happened the some problem about
> I2C5 and I2C6 on A board when it used for other purpose.
It's handled by platform_device id. Even though turn on all I2C. A
board don't register 5 or 6 then no configure any GPIOs.
>
> Of course can happen regardless of number of I2C channel, but if more I2C
> channels, the probability can be increased.
>
> Anyway I know Mr. Han is preparing I2C patches for it and almost done.
> How about continuing discussion for this after submitting it?
>
> I think we have some time that talk about this issue.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Best regards,
> Kgene.
> --
> Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer,
> SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 0/7] ARM: S5PC210: I2C devices support and Universal board updates
@ 2010-10-05 8:46 ` Kyungmin Park
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Kyungmin Park @ 2010-10-05 8:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote:
> Kyungmin Park wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
> Hi,
>
>> I think we made some conclusion. first apply the current style and
>> improve it later for consistency.
>>
> Yeah, we should decide for this.
>
> However, it's expected following problem with current I2C style.
>
> Suppose A board want to use only I2C0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 as I2C and B board want
> to use all of I2C channels as I2C. If use one kernel image for A and B,
> maybe selected all I2C channels. It can be happened the some problem about
> I2C5 and I2C6 on A board when it used for other purpose.
It's handled by platform_device id. Even though turn on all I2C. A
board don't register 5 or 6 then no configure any GPIOs.
>
> Of course can happen regardless of number of I2C channel, but if more I2C
> channels, the probability can be increased.
>
> Anyway I know Mr. Han is preparing I2C patches for it and almost done.
> How about continuing discussion for this after submitting it?
>
> I think we have some time that talk about this issue.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Best regards,
> Kgene.
> --
> Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer,
> SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH 0/7] ARM: S5PC210: I2C devices support and Universal board updates
2010-10-05 8:46 ` Kyungmin Park
@ 2010-10-07 1:37 ` Kukjin Kim
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Kukjin Kim @ 2010-10-07 1:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Kyungmin Park'; +Cc: linux-arm-kernel, linux-samsung-soc, ben-linux
Kyungmin Park wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote:
> > Kyungmin Park wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> > Hi,
> >
> >> I think we made some conclusion. first apply the current style and
> >> improve it later for consistency.
> >>
> > Yeah, we should decide for this.
> >
> > However, it's expected following problem with current I2C style.
> >
> > Suppose A board want to use only I2C0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 as I2C and B board
want
> > to use all of I2C channels as I2C. If use one kernel image for A and B,
> > maybe selected all I2C channels. It can be happened the some problem
about
> > I2C5 and I2C6 on A board when it used for other purpose.
>
> It's handled by platform_device id. Even though turn on all I2C. A
> board don't register 5 or 6 then no configure any GPIOs.
>
Yes, you're right.
Please kindly ignore it.
> >
> > Of course can happen regardless of number of I2C channel, but if more
I2C
> > channels, the probability can be increased.
> >
> > Anyway I know Mr. Han is preparing I2C patches for it and almost done.
> > How about continuing discussion for this after submitting it?
> >
> > I think we have some time that talk about this issue.
> >
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 0/7] ARM: S5PC210: I2C devices support and Universal board updates
@ 2010-10-07 1:37 ` Kukjin Kim
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Kukjin Kim @ 2010-10-07 1:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Kyungmin Park wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 5:40 PM, Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com> wrote:
> > Kyungmin Park wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> > Hi,
> >
> >> I think we made some conclusion. first apply the current style and
> >> improve it later for consistency.
> >>
> > Yeah, we should decide for this.
> >
> > However, it's expected following problem with current I2C style.
> >
> > Suppose A board want to use only I2C0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 as I2C and B board
want
> > to use all of I2C channels as I2C. If use one kernel image for A and B,
> > maybe selected all I2C channels. It can be happened the some problem
about
> > I2C5 and I2C6 on A board when it used for other purpose.
>
> It's handled by platform_device id. Even though turn on all I2C. A
> board don't register 5 or 6 then no configure any GPIOs.
>
Yes, you're right.
Please kindly ignore it.
> >
> > Of course can happen regardless of number of I2C channel, but if more
I2C
> > channels, the probability can be increased.
> >
> > Anyway I know Mr. Han is preparing I2C patches for it and almost done.
> > How about continuing discussion for this after submitting it?
> >
> > I think we have some time that talk about this issue.
> >
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, Senior Engineer,
SW Solution Development Team, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH 0/7] ARM: S5PC210: I2C devices support and Universal board updates
2010-10-05 8:40 ` Kukjin Kim
@ 2010-10-05 8:56 ` Marek Szyprowski
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Marek Szyprowski @ 2010-10-05 8:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Kukjin Kim', 'Kyungmin Park', linux-arm-kernel
Cc: linux-samsung-soc, ben-linux
Hello,
On Tuesday, October 05, 2010 10:40 AM Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > I think we made some conclusion. first apply the current style and
> > improve it later for consistency.
> >
> Yeah, we should decide for this.
>
> However, it's expected following problem with current I2C style.
>
> Suppose A board want to use only I2C0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 as I2C and B board want
> to use all of I2C channels as I2C. If use one kernel image for A and B,
> maybe selected all I2C channels. It can be happened the some problem about
> I2C5 and I2C6 on A board when it used for other purpose.
Could you explain it in more detailed way? I really don't see any problem here.
Please distinguish the registration of s3c-i2cX device to platform bus and the
fact the structure has been compiled into the kernel.
In your case all dev-i2cX entries will be compiled into the kernel, but board
A will REGISTER to platform bus only the entries that are in use. No runtime
problem can ever happen. That's the main basis of the kernel device framework.
> Of course can happen regardless of number of I2C channel, but if more I2C
> channels, the probability can be increased.
Again, I really don't understand your concerns.
> Anyway I know Mr. Han is preparing I2C patches for it and almost done.
> How about continuing discussion for this after submitting it?
>
> I think we have some time that talk about this issue.
Best regards
--
Marek Szyprowski
Samsung Poland R&D Center
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 0/7] ARM: S5PC210: I2C devices support and Universal board updates
@ 2010-10-05 8:56 ` Marek Szyprowski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Marek Szyprowski @ 2010-10-05 8:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-arm-kernel
Hello,
On Tuesday, October 05, 2010 10:40 AM Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > I think we made some conclusion. first apply the current style and
> > improve it later for consistency.
> >
> Yeah, we should decide for this.
>
> However, it's expected following problem with current I2C style.
>
> Suppose A board want to use only I2C0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 7 as I2C and B board want
> to use all of I2C channels as I2C. If use one kernel image for A and B,
> maybe selected all I2C channels. It can be happened the some problem about
> I2C5 and I2C6 on A board when it used for other purpose.
Could you explain it in more detailed way? I really don't see any problem here.
Please distinguish the registration of s3c-i2cX device to platform bus and the
fact the structure has been compiled into the kernel.
In your case all dev-i2cX entries will be compiled into the kernel, but board
A will REGISTER to platform bus only the entries that are in use. No runtime
problem can ever happen. That's the main basis of the kernel device framework.
> Of course can happen regardless of number of I2C channel, but if more I2C
> channels, the probability can be increased.
Again, I really don't understand your concerns.
> Anyway I know Mr. Han is preparing I2C patches for it and almost done.
> How about continuing discussion for this after submitting it?
>
> I think we have some time that talk about this issue.
Best regards
--
Marek Szyprowski
Samsung Poland R&D Center
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread