From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marek Vasut Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 V2] MXS: Set I2C timing registers for mxs-i2c Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:13:31 +0200 Message-ID: <201207101713.31498.marex@denx.de> References: <1341554956-17416-1-git-send-email-marex@denx.de> <201207091758.22788.marex@denx.de> <20120710140911.GK20456@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120710140911.GK20456-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Robert Schwebel Cc: Wolfram Sang , Fabio Estevam , Wolfgang Denk , Detlev Zundel , Stefano Babic , Sascha Hauer , linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Uwe =?iso-8859-1?q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= , Shawn Guo , Dong Aisheng , Linux ARM kernel List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org Dear Robert Schwebel, > On Mon, Jul 09, 2012 at 05:58:22PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > > > The kernel should work for all users, not only for the majority, so: > > > Better safe than sorry. > > > > > > Also, defaults should make the system work. Tuning can be done later by > > > somebody who understands what is needed. > > > > > > And frankly, this attitude which made you add a potential regression is > > > worrisome. I'd suggest to give stability a higher priority. > > > > I believe you misunderstood my intention. Setting it to 400kHz was done > > because it's what most people will use, therefore avoiding duplication > > (most of the board files will override this setting now). All right, > > your sane defaults here can be applied, I won't argue. > > I think all I2C chips support 100 kHz, but only selected ones support > 400 kHz. Yes, this is correct. And I never argued about this. But anyway, V3 patch is out, let's cut this discussion short. Best regards, Marek Vasut