Status on 405GP i2c driver

Status on 405GP i2c driver

[andrew may]

It looks like this question was lasted asked around Jan/Feb, but
I have not seen an update on the status recently.

I have looked at the i2c-2.6.3 and I am reluctant to spend any
time working on it since it needs to go through some formating
changes to get rid of the C++ style comments. I don't want to
deal with a merge issues of doing a style change unless I know
it will go in.

I am also more inclined to use the actual transfer function
I have worked with in the PPCBoot rather than the functions
in the linux i2c code.

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Status on 405GP i2c driver

[Armin Kuster]

andrew may wrote:

> It looks like this question was lasted asked around Jan/Feb, but
> I have not seen an update on the status recently.
>
> I have looked at the i2c-2.6.3 and I am reluctant to spend any
> time working on it since it needs to go through some formating
> changes to get rid of the C++ style comments. I don't want to
> deal with a merge issues of doing a style change unless I know
> it will go in.
>
> I am also more inclined to use the actual transfer function
> I have worked with in the PPCBoot rather than the functions
> in the linux i2c code.
>

then I recommend using ppcboot.

--armin


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Status on 405GP i2c driver

[andrew may]

On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 10:54:33AM -0700, Armin Kuster wrote:
> then I recommend using ppcboot.

Have you worked on the driver much recently? If not I can
take a run at it and submit it, but I don't know how much
of the comment OCP driver stuff I will get done.

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Status on 405GP i2c driver

[Armin Kuster]

andrew may wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 10:54:33AM -0700, Armin Kuster wrote:
>
>>then I recommend using ppcboot.
>>
>
> Have you worked on the driver much recently? If not I can
> take a run at it and submit it, but I don't know how much
> of the comment OCP driver stuff I will get done.
>
Andrew,



I have done a lot of work on it and I submitted it to the i2c mailing
list.  There is a bit more to do and i am in the middle of change the
ocp stuff.

--armin


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Status on 405GP i2c driver

[andrew may]

On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 11:35:23AM -0700, Armin Kuster wrote:
> andrew may wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 10:54:33AM -0700, Armin Kuster wrote:
> >
> >>then I recommend using ppcboot.
> >>
> >
> > Have you worked on the driver much recently? If not I can
> > take a run at it and submit it, but I don't know how much
> > of the comment OCP driver stuff I will get done.
> >
> Andrew,
>
>
>
> I have done a lot of work on it and I submitted it to the i2c mailing
> list.  There is a bit more to do and i am in the middle of change the
> ocp stuff.

I take it this is it: http://archives.andrew.net.au/lm-sensors/msg00995.html.
The file renames hides the actual changes you have made. I still don't
see it in CVS yet.

Do you plan to continue to try to go to the i2c people or just stick in
the BK tree? If we both start working on it it would be much easier in
the BK tree.

I will be using the i2c bus for my RTC so I have no real intrest in building
things outside the main kernel.

When you say change "ocp stuff" is that just for the i2c driver or all of
the ocp drivers?

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Status on 405GP i2c driver

[Matt Porter]

On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 02:16:01PM -0700, andrew may wrote:
>
> It looks like this question was lasted asked around Jan/Feb, but
> I have not seen an update on the status recently.
>
> I have looked at the i2c-2.6.3 and I am reluctant to spend any
> time working on it since it needs to go through some formating
> changes to get rid of the C++ style comments. I don't want to
> deal with a merge issues of doing a style change unless I know
> it will go in.

I pushed a modified version of Armin's latest updated patch in.
I'd love to see the C-- comments go away but I'm too lazy to play
with it beyond testing it on my platform.  If anybody sends patches
that clean up some more of the ugliness then I'll push them in.

Regards,
--
Matt Porter
MontaVista Software, Inc.
mporter@mvista.com

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Status on 405GP i2c driver

[andrew may]

On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 04:05:48PM -0700, Matt Porter wrote:
>
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 02:16:01PM -0700, andrew may wrote:
> >
> > It looks like this question was lasted asked around Jan/Feb, but
> > I have not seen an update on the status recently.
> >
> > I have looked at the i2c-2.6.3 and I am reluctant to spend any
> > time working on it since it needs to go through some formating
> > changes to get rid of the C++ style comments. I don't want to
> > deal with a merge issues of doing a style change unless I know
> > it will go in.
>
> I pushed a modified version of Armin's latest updated patch in.
> I'd love to see the C-- comments go away but I'm too lazy to play
> with it beyond testing it on my platform.  If anybody sends patches
> that clean up some more of the ugliness then I'll push them in.

I have just started to use BK and this does provide an interesting
test. I had started to merge the stuff in steps before you did your
push. So here are some bk export's -tpatch of what I tried. I go
lazy on the merge of the last Makefile and I thing I screwed it up.

i2c-2.6.3.patch is a patch to bring this up to the i2c 2.6.3 level.
i2c-2.6.3-405.patch adds the 405 files in 2.6.3
i2c-2.6.3-armin.patch is Armin's patch without the file rename.
i2c-merge1 & 2 should be just file mv's but I didn't do it too
well.

They are too big for one post and I don't have a spot to post
them. So I will try seperate emails.


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Status on 405GP i2c driver

[andrew may]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7 bytes --]

First.

[-- Attachment #2: i2c-2.6.3.patch.gz --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 19030 bytes --]

Re: Status on 405GP i2c driver [PATCH] 2nd

[andrew may]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2 bytes --]




[-- Attachment #2: i2c-2.6.3-405.patch.gz --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 12743 bytes --]

Re: Status on 405GP i2c driver [PATCH] 3rd

[andrew may]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 10 bytes --]


Another


[-- Attachment #2: i2c-2.6.3-armin.patch.gz --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 12656 bytes --]

Re: Status on 405GP i2c driver [PATCH] 4th

[andrew may]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 9 bytes --]

Another


[-- Attachment #2: i2c-merge1.gz --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 11125 bytes --]

Re: Status on 405GP i2c driver [PATCH] last

[andrew may]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 9 bytes --]

last one

[-- Attachment #2: i2c-merge2.gz --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 12163 bytes --]

Re: Status on 405GP i2c driver

[Matt Porter]

On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 06:23:01PM -0700, andrew may wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 23, 2002 at 04:05:48PM -0700, Matt Porter wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 22, 2002 at 02:16:01PM -0700, andrew may wrote:
> > >
> > > It looks like this question was lasted asked around Jan/Feb, but
> > > I have not seen an update on the status recently.
> > >
> > > I have looked at the i2c-2.6.3 and I am reluctant to spend any
> > > time working on it since it needs to go through some formating
> > > changes to get rid of the C++ style comments. I don't want to
> > > deal with a merge issues of doing a style change unless I know
> > > it will go in.
> >
> > I pushed a modified version of Armin's latest updated patch in.
> > I'd love to see the C-- comments go away but I'm too lazy to play
> > with it beyond testing it on my platform.  If anybody sends patches
> > that clean up some more of the ugliness then I'll push them in.
>
> I have just started to use BK and this does provide an interesting
> test. I had started to merge the stuff in steps before you did your
> push. So here are some bk export's -tpatch of what I tried. I go
> lazy on the merge of the last Makefile and I thing I screwed it up.
>
> i2c-2.6.3.patch is a patch to bring this up to the i2c 2.6.3 level.
> i2c-2.6.3-405.patch adds the 405 files in 2.6.3
> i2c-2.6.3-armin.patch is Armin's patch without the file rename.
> i2c-merge1 & 2 should be just file mv's but I didn't do it too
> well.

It's not a good idea to merge the i2c-2.6.3 support into 2_4_devel.
The idea here is to make available a 4xx IIC driver that can be used
with the current i2c infrastructure in the 2.4 kernel and can be
changed in sync with any ocp changes that are made.

Regards,
--
Matt Porter
MontaVista Software, Inc.
mporter@mvista.com

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Status on 405GP i2c driver

[andrew may]

On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 07:47:33AM -0700, Matt Porter wrote:
> It's not a good idea to merge the i2c-2.6.3 support into 2_4_devel.

It seemed that Armins patch to the i2c list was against 2.6.3 so I deciede
to merge that in before I merged in Armin's patch. I started doing the merge
before you added in the files so that made things interesting. Unless you
think 2.6.3 has some new bugs I see no reason to back out the changes in
my tree.

> The idea here is to make available a 4xx IIC driver that can be used
> with the current i2c infrastructure in the 2.4 kernel and can be
> changed in sync with any ocp changes that are made.

I will try to make sure that my patches don't class with any of the core
i2c stuff.

My idea for posting the patches was just to show what I did in my tree,
at this point we should be insync in terms of the actual ibm_ocp drivers.


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Status on 405GP i2c driver

[Matt Porter]

On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 08:39:09AM -0700, andrew may wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 07:47:33AM -0700, Matt Porter wrote:
> > It's not a good idea to merge the i2c-2.6.3 support into 2_4_devel.
>
> It seemed that Armins patch to the i2c list was against 2.6.3 so I deciede
> to merge that in before I merged in Armin's patch. I started doing the merge
> before you added in the files so that made things interesting. Unless you
> think 2.6.3 has some new bugs I see no reason to back out the changes in
> my tree.
>
> > The idea here is to make available a 4xx IIC driver that can be used
> > with the current i2c infrastructure in the 2.4 kernel and can be
> > changed in sync with any ocp changes that are made.
>
> I will try to make sure that my patches don't class with any of the core
> i2c stuff.
>
> My idea for posting the patches was just to show what I did in my tree,
> at this point we should be insync in terms of the actual ibm_ocp drivers.

Gotcha now...I thought you were indicating a desire to have all the
i2c-2.6.3 core stuff in your first patches added to 2_4_devel.

Thanks,
--
Matt Porter
MontaVista Software, Inc.
mporter@mvista.com

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: Status on 405GP i2c driver

[Armin]

andrew may wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2002 at 07:47:33AM -0700, Matt Porter wrote:
>
>>It's not a good idea to merge the i2c-2.6.3 support into 2_4_devel.
>>
>
> It seemed that Armins patch to the i2c list was against 2.6.3 so I deciede
> to merge that in before I merged in Armin's patch. I started doing the merge
> before you added in the files so that made things interesting. Unless you
> think 2.6.3 has some new bugs I see no reason to back out the changes in
> my tree.
>

Yes the patch sent to the i2c mailing list was against 2.6.3 since thats
their latest version.  The *.c & *.h files should be the same in both trees

armin


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

file missing ? (was :Re: Status on 405GP i2c driver)

["David Müller (ELSOFT AG)"]

Hello

Is it possible that the file "linux/i2c-algo-ibm_ocp.h", which should be
part of the latest PPC4xx i2c patches from Matt Porter i think, didn't
made it into the linuxppc_2_4_devel?

Dave


** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/

Re: file missing ? (was :Re: Status on 405GP i2c driver)

[Matt Porter]

On Thu, Apr 25, 2002 at 10:04:32AM +0200, "David M?ller (ELSOFT AG)" wrote:
>
> Hello
>
> Is it possible that the file "linux/i2c-algo-ibm_ocp.h", which should be
> part of the latest PPC4xx i2c patches from Matt Porter i think, didn't
> made it into the linuxppc_2_4_devel?

Thanks. I missed it in the previous changeset, it's there now.

--
Matt Porter
MontaVista Software, Inc.
mporter@mvista.com

** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/