Re: 10-bit address support

[Wolfram Sang <w.sang-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 918 bytes --]

Hi Jean,

> > Wouldn't the cleanest solution be
> > 
> > "%d-%02x" for 7 bit
> > "%d-%04x" for 10 bit?
> 
> I'd rather use %03x for 10-bit then, for consistency.

Yup, I realized this a few hours later, too. This would leave the
possibility to add true 16-bit addressing of the next to be i2c standard
;)

> internally), but unfortunately it would have had to be implemented in
> the early days, not 8 years later.

Yes, and hopefully we can live with this drawback well enough.

> 0xa000 is not more intrusive than 0x1000, so if the majority - i.e.
> you ;) - is in favor of this, that's fine with me. I'll send a patch
> later today.

You can already add my:

Acked-by: Wolfram Sang <w.sang-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org>

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Wolfram Sang                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]