From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: [PATCH v14 0/3] Add ASPEED AST2600 I2Cv2 controller driver
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2024 15:39:17 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zv6QdUuiUFvXjcd4@smile.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dun5dterlkikft4p2yuuebb2e4nyzed7xeofmeivzldeardhmf@kzv3iokk6cxn>
On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 02:20:54PM +0200, Andi Shyti wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 01:15:50PM GMT, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 03:41:57AM +0000, Ryan Chen wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2024 at 03:02:10PM +0800, Ryan Chen wrote:
...
> > > > Is it possible to switch to new terminology wherever it's possible?
> > > > I.e. master --> controller, slave --> target. See, for example, f872d28500bd
> > > > ("i2c: uniphier-f: reword according to newest specification").
> > > >
> > > Just for cover latter? Or I should modify for each patches commit message?
> > > Or entire i2c driver statement need switch to target?
> >
> > I believe everywhere, where it applies: driver code, comments, documentation,
> > commit messages...
>
> If the datasheet refers to a register, state, or any other
> hardware property as master/slave, we should retain the
> master/slave terminology. Otherwise, we should follow the i2c and
> smbus specifications and use controller/target.
Indeed, makes sense. Thank you, Andi, for the corrections!
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org>
Cc: Ryan Chen <ryan_chen@aspeedtech.com>,
"brendan.higgins@linux.dev" <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>,
"benh@kernel.crashing.org" <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
"joel@jms.id.au" <joel@jms.id.au>,
"robh@kernel.org" <robh@kernel.org>,
"krzk+dt@kernel.org" <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
"conor+dt@kernel.org" <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
"andrew@codeconstruct.com.au" <andrew@codeconstruct.com.au>,
"p.zabel@pengutronix.de" <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>,
"linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>,
"openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org" <openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org" <linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 0/3] Add ASPEED AST2600 I2Cv2 controller driver
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2024 15:39:17 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zv6QdUuiUFvXjcd4@smile.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dun5dterlkikft4p2yuuebb2e4nyzed7xeofmeivzldeardhmf@kzv3iokk6cxn>
On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 02:20:54PM +0200, Andi Shyti wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 01:15:50PM GMT, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 03:41:57AM +0000, Ryan Chen wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2024 at 03:02:10PM +0800, Ryan Chen wrote:
...
> > > > Is it possible to switch to new terminology wherever it's possible?
> > > > I.e. master --> controller, slave --> target. See, for example, f872d28500bd
> > > > ("i2c: uniphier-f: reword according to newest specification").
> > > >
> > > Just for cover latter? Or I should modify for each patches commit message?
> > > Or entire i2c driver statement need switch to target?
> >
> > I believe everywhere, where it applies: driver code, comments, documentation,
> > commit messages...
>
> If the datasheet refers to a register, state, or any other
> hardware property as master/slave, we should retain the
> master/slave terminology. Otherwise, we should follow the i2c and
> smbus specifications and use controller/target.
Indeed, makes sense. Thank you, Andi, for the corrections!
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org>
Cc: "robh@kernel.org" <robh@kernel.org>,
"conor+dt@kernel.org" <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
Ryan Chen <ryan_chen@aspeedtech.com>,
"linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org" <linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"devicetree@vger.kernel.org" <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
"openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org" <openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"brendan.higgins@linux.dev" <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>,
"joel@jms.id.au" <joel@jms.id.au>,
"p.zabel@pengutronix.de" <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>,
"krzk+dt@kernel.org" <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v14 0/3] Add ASPEED AST2600 I2Cv2 controller driver
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2024 15:39:17 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zv6QdUuiUFvXjcd4@smile.fi.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dun5dterlkikft4p2yuuebb2e4nyzed7xeofmeivzldeardhmf@kzv3iokk6cxn>
On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 02:20:54PM +0200, Andi Shyti wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 01:15:50PM GMT, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 03:41:57AM +0000, Ryan Chen wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Oct 02, 2024 at 03:02:10PM +0800, Ryan Chen wrote:
...
> > > > Is it possible to switch to new terminology wherever it's possible?
> > > > I.e. master --> controller, slave --> target. See, for example, f872d28500bd
> > > > ("i2c: uniphier-f: reword according to newest specification").
> > > >
> > > Just for cover latter? Or I should modify for each patches commit message?
> > > Or entire i2c driver statement need switch to target?
> >
> > I believe everywhere, where it applies: driver code, comments, documentation,
> > commit messages...
>
> If the datasheet refers to a register, state, or any other
> hardware property as master/slave, we should retain the
> master/slave terminology. Otherwise, we should follow the i2c and
> smbus specifications and use controller/target.
Indeed, makes sense. Thank you, Andi, for the corrections!
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-03 12:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-02 7:02 [PATCH v14 0/3] Add ASPEED AST2600 I2Cv2 controller driver Ryan Chen
2024-10-02 7:02 ` Ryan Chen
2024-10-02 7:02 ` [PATCH v14 1/3] dt-bindings: i2c: aspeed: support for AST2600-i2cv2 Ryan Chen
2024-10-02 7:02 ` Ryan Chen
2024-10-02 7:02 ` [PATCH v14 2/3] i2c: aspeed: support AST2600 i2c new register mode driver Ryan Chen
2024-10-02 7:02 ` Ryan Chen
2024-10-05 7:36 ` kernel test robot
2024-10-05 7:36 ` kernel test robot
2024-10-10 13:40 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-10-10 13:40 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-10-10 13:40 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-10-11 0:16 ` Ryan Chen
2024-10-11 0:16 ` Ryan Chen
2024-10-11 0:16 ` Ryan Chen
2024-10-05 10:00 ` kernel test robot
2024-10-05 10:00 ` kernel test robot
2024-10-02 7:02 ` [PATCH v14 3/3] i2c: aspeed: support AST2600 i2c new register slave " Ryan Chen
2024-10-02 7:02 ` Ryan Chen
2024-10-02 14:35 ` [PATCH v14 0/3] Add ASPEED AST2600 I2Cv2 controller driver Andy Shevchenko
2024-10-02 14:35 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-10-02 14:35 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-10-03 3:41 ` Ryan Chen
2024-10-03 3:41 ` Ryan Chen
2024-10-03 3:41 ` Ryan Chen
2024-10-03 10:15 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-10-03 10:15 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-10-03 10:15 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-10-03 12:20 ` Andi Shyti
2024-10-03 12:20 ` Andi Shyti
2024-10-03 12:20 ` Andi Shyti
2024-10-03 12:39 ` Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2024-10-03 12:39 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-10-03 12:39 ` Andy Shevchenko
2024-10-04 6:58 ` Ryan Chen
2024-10-04 6:58 ` Ryan Chen
2024-10-04 6:58 ` Ryan Chen
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=Zv6QdUuiUFvXjcd4@smile.fi.intel.com \
--to=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org \
/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.