From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfram Sang Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] i2c:at91: Add device tree property to set clock-frequency Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:09:08 +0100 Message-ID: <20140311110908.GB24766@katana> References: <1394511938-28653-1-git-send-email-mark.roszko@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="p4qYPpj5QlsIQJ0K" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD Cc: Marek Roszko , Ludovic Desroches , linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, " mailing list" List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org --p4qYPpj5QlsIQJ0K Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > Examples : > > @@ -23,6 +24,7 @@ i2c0: i2c@fff84000 { > > #address-cells =3D <1>; > > #size-cells =3D <0>; > > clocks =3D <&twi0_clk>; > > + clock-frequency =3D <400000>; > >=20 > The bindings is wrong it=E2=80=99s not the bus frequency but the max freq= uency >=20 > as you describe the bus not the device frequency. And this is this one th= at limit the bus It is not wrong, it is since "the beginning" the way i2c bus speeds are described. It is well known that, in fact, the devices should have a speed limiting property, yet nobody has sent in patches so far. --p4qYPpj5QlsIQJ0K Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.15 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJTHu7UAAoJEBQN5MwUoCm29/IP/1wszbE+yr4qVTXwCYirV6Sw 2u/C6TQOfjZOXqkNFFsM4yJ6H7bk3mjWYzkMs/L1DEA1qm+jF/Qdv+XInbffC+u1 rAQ5+kTBgDlyq2hf0QBxLTMWkypS1vvcfv/pmVaFux7391MJTJIjae73Q1Rul8Lc 6u9SbhnEfOIAmHpqsxxC4q3YmTa1cJIF2OpD8ycVmMMe2MuSfFrOqqk7v909cE9s 0aa/ZMeASGhL0fdFZDYlMv53a4MzNu3gICSXq3Vz5wUvgdw/5fEqFzgTTaXrPimZ 0bUYbAxiEGYT7v16ZWeKnk0JV2wryn00FrquGTPZZXI1QEGEEJ3XkcfhAlYpQJA5 QCmI/HXMv0m0dIbVtdXAZwHildNbkoJCMv/k95dMLV+2yIyH2dmiXdgsmtx65rGM PIR/fKByjKEh2NNgJkqKL4Ed0e58HH1gC2Y8IBSNav0rPDOdHQC8nbd5Z0S1cpxE X/Y9K4d7DWFhMLQ/BeLwMcJzKFHVdgTRJEnOIe+pvIfpSMl9RNHzACaL/kGvku/i y6Sk3jxfQ/CWuqZBxXebL3Ypdb4zsiK6puqiQDk/uN46aIUoZHJrAoDYKHtLeiLJ kRJud8fr6cjLRtRiuL90SBPB8XV+Gam7gBMLBxVQihz1+Qq7qZBjFtoDJEMz1/qg cnIPmwNGHVHjlt1cXZ/Y =+H3k -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --p4qYPpj5QlsIQJ0K-- From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: wsa@the-dreams.de (Wolfram Sang) Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 12:09:08 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v3] i2c:at91: Add device tree property to set clock-frequency In-Reply-To: References: <1394511938-28653-1-git-send-email-mark.roszko@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20140311110908.GB24766@katana> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org > > Examples : > > @@ -23,6 +24,7 @@ i2c0: i2c at fff84000 { > > #address-cells = <1>; > > #size-cells = <0>; > > clocks = <&twi0_clk>; > > + clock-frequency = <400000>; > > > The bindings is wrong it?s not the bus frequency but the max frequency > > as you describe the bus not the device frequency. And this is this one that limit the bus It is not wrong, it is since "the beginning" the way i2c bus speeds are described. It is well known that, in fact, the devices should have a speed limiting property, yet nobody has sent in patches so far. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: