From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-by2on0107.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([207.46.100.107]:51552 "EHLO na01-by2-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751268AbaJAVRI (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Oct 2014 17:17:08 -0400 Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 14:16:57 -0700 From: Guenter Roeck To: Wolfram Sang CC: Danielle Costantino , linux-i2c , Bjorn Helgaas , Jiri Kosina , Andrew Morton , "David S. Miller" , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , Rajat Jain Subject: Re: Fwd: [Proposal] PM sleep children of inactive I2C bus segments off Masters in multi-master systems Message-ID: <20141001211657.GA7904@svl-evodev-groeck.juniper.net> References: <20141001184304.GA6832@svl-evodev-groeck.juniper.net> <20141001194115.GA6948@svl-evodev-groeck.juniper.net> <20141001202058.GB6948@svl-evodev-groeck.juniper.net> <20141001204302.GA7744@svl-evodev-groeck.juniper.net> <20141001211046.GA2368@katana> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" In-Reply-To: <20141001211046.GA2368@katana> Sender: linux-pci-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 11:10:47PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > Maybe you can find an error code which with some level of confidence > > reflects "lost mastership". Then you can implement whatever makes sense > > for your use case in your user space application(s). > > We have a documented fault code for ArbitrationLost and that is -EAGAIN > (see Documentation/i2c/fault-codes). If a driver does use something > else, patches are very welcome. > > Other than that, I find this thread very confusing. Of course can > another master modify the clients, this is what multi-master is all > about, no? > That is the point I was trying to make in one of my earlier replies. Guenter