From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 270EBC388F7 for ; Sun, 25 Oct 2020 19:00:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C277C22284 for ; Sun, 25 Oct 2020 19:00:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mail.ee header.i=@mail.ee header.b="Yi1xgLiU" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1418406AbgJYTAB (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Oct 2020 15:00:01 -0400 Received: from eu-shark1.inbox.eu ([195.216.236.81]:58178 "EHLO eu-shark1.inbox.eu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1418405AbgJYTAB (ORCPT ); Sun, 25 Oct 2020 15:00:01 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 374 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Sun, 25 Oct 2020 14:59:59 EDT Received: from eu-shark1.inbox.eu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eu-shark1-out.inbox.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id C08986C006AC; Sun, 25 Oct 2020 20:53:43 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=mail.ee; s=20150108; t=1603652023; bh=/L+8Tzs+lfv26ikHJRBktySxIrJHPQ7fcPUYKAnW1XY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=Yi1xgLiUlRU7PHtqRn53IVgKTQWVwphtendaBbEFxykj1ac+ho/hKi/x0aBdc26NM AWPLeQy/ayXsuFT3U5edwbxd5bygsRA90ut08lj5qvmY9qgSeCOnuNalwk5Fof6a89 O4MVwwtSlbaZc4eqzsojQoOg56654SxSBt7prssY= Received: from mail.inbox.eu (eu-pop1 [127.0.0.1]) by eu-shark1-in.inbox.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E5E86C006A9; Sun, 25 Oct 2020 20:53:43 +0200 (EET) Received: from hp15 (unknown [185.176.222.57]) (Authenticated sender: arzamas-16@mail.ee) by mail.inbox.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 2BD9E1BE00B2; Sun, 25 Oct 2020 20:53:42 +0200 (EET) Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2020 21:53:38 +0300 From: Boris Lysov To: Qii Wang Cc: , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt-bindings: i2c: i2c-mt65xx: Update binding example Message-ID: <20201025215338.63664268@hp15> In-Reply-To: <1600049386.25719.7.camel@mhfsdcap03> References: <20200904223345.3daea5ad@hp15> <1599442087.25719.2.camel@mhfsdcap03> <20200907180841.0044d571@hp15> <1600049386.25719.7.camel@mhfsdcap03> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: OK X-ESPOL: +dBm1NUOBk3XhyLHXxmqCAcypixLVOnh/+SmqX1UnXP/Ly+DeFYPUhKpmGtqLw+1uyM= Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 10:09:46 +0800 Qii Wang wrote: > None of the examples you cited are the upstream code of our official > release Where can I access the official upstream release for both MT6577 and MT6589? Me and other developers would certainly like to research it. > , and the name of customer's SOC cannot be accurately evaluated. I'm sorry, but I don't understand what do you mean by "customer's SOC". I own a device with MT6577, and in all source code bundles I had listed in the previous message the SoCs are either MT6577 or MT6589. As of now, the code in the example of i2c-mt65xx driver documentation is declared compatible with MT6577, but it clearly does *not* work on actual MT6577 SoC.