From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.ebshome.net (gate.ebshome.net [64.81.67.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits)) (Client CN "gate.ebshome.net", Issuer "gate.ebshome.net" (not verified)) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D7742BDA2 for ; Thu, 14 Oct 2004 05:34:27 +1000 (EST) Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2004 12:34:23 -0700 From: Eugene Surovegin To: "Robert P. J. Day" Message-ID: <20041013193423.GA28349@gate.ebshome.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: Cc: Embedded PPC Linux list Subject: Re: "I2C" versus "IIC" List-Id: Linux on Embedded PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, Oct 13, 2004 at 02:26:23PM -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > > i was just about to rename some of my variables and macros to be > consistent with what i *thought* was the standard nomenclature of > "IIC" as opposed to "I2C". just checked include/asm-ppc, and grepped > for case-insensitive instances of both strings ... oh, god. there's > really no preferred usage, is there? Philips' documentation uses I2C, not IIC, so I guess this is _official_ name of the _bus_. Some vendors (like IBM in their 4xx parts) use IIC to name I2C _interface_ to distinguish it from I2C _bus_ (they specifically mention this in the chip manual). For example, in the corresponding 4xx driver I used "iic" because it was written for IBM IIC _interface_. -- Eugene.