From: NEO-Technologies / Julien CHAUVEAU <julien.chauveau@neo-technologies.fr>
To: Max Schwarz <max.schwarz@online.de>, Karl Palsson <karlp@tweak.net.au>
Cc: "Heiko Stübner" <heiko@sntech.de>,
"Addy Ke" <addy.ke@rock-chips.com>,
wsa@the-dreams.de, "Mark Rutland" <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND..." <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
"Russell King" <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
"Pawel Moll" <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
"Ian Campbell" <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>,
"open list" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..."
<linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org>,
"Rob Herring" <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
"Kumar Gala" <galak@codeaurora.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..."
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: rockchip: use internal pull-up resistors on I2C busses
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 15:34:27 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5450FAF3.2010208@neo-technologies.fr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <32904940.RFLKbTnBmv@xq-nb>
Hi everyone,
Okay, I understand your opinion. So let's drop my patch in this case.
Thank you for your comments.
Julien
Le 29/10/2014 15:02, Max Schwarz a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> I'll agree with Karl and Doug. If you (as a board vendor/maintainer/etc) want
> to use I2C, it's *your* responsibility to provide the pullup resistors by
> either including pullup resistors on the board or by enabling the internal
> ones.
> Either way, you should think a moment about the consequences (frequency/trace
> length limitations), which is why I'm also against the pullup-by-default
> behavior.
>
> Also, it's much harder to diagnose effects like Doug is describing (slightly
> out-of-spec due to internal + external pulls) than the effects you are seeing
> without any pullups. With your i2cdetect results my first thought would have
> been "are there pullups on the bus?".
>
> Cheers,
> Max
>
> Am Mittwoch, 29. Oktober 2014, 13:44:15 schrieb Karl Palsson:
>> I'd be more inclined to have pulls disabled by default, it's more standard
>> with what smaller micros do, but I've no experience with these bigger
>> cortex-a parts. It's also the "least surprise" path. If you want to try
>> and use the onboard pullups, you can specify that in your board file, but
>> for people deliberately selecting pullups for their timing and load
>> expectations, being required to take an extra step to turn off something
>> seems unexpected.
>>
>> If you _want_ to be able to probe an i2c bus for devices added aftermarket,
>> on a board that didn't get i2c pull ups because no devices were planned,
>> and you want to turn on the internal pullups for that, I think that's
>> something you need to do yourself, not making it a hard default in the SoC
>> dtsi file.
>>
>> so, if it's off by default, you get this
>> dtsi dts
>> Board1, i2c periphs, designed pullups => off -
>> board2, no peripsh, pulls in case => off -
>> board3, no periphs, forgot pulls, pray=> off on
>>
>> If you turn it on by default, sure, it causes no harm in most cases, but
>> you're no longer getting the values you expect, without having to turn off
>> things that are not default anyway.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Karl Palsson
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 02:17:23PM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote:
>>> Hi Addy, Max, Wolfram,
>>>
>>> after Doug's explanation of disfavour [0] and Julien's subsequent response
>>> I'm not sure which direction to go. So if possible I'd like to collect
>>> some more opinions of people knowing a lot more about i2c internals than
>>> myself :-) .
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Heiko
>>>
>>>
>>> [0] http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-rockchip/2014-October/000934.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-29 14:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-28 10:36 [PATCH v2] ARM: dts: rockchip: use internal pull-up resistors on I2C busses Julien CHAUVEAU
2014-10-29 4:45 ` Doug Anderson
2014-10-29 9:50 ` NEO-Technologies / Julien CHAUVEAU
2014-10-29 13:17 ` Heiko Stübner
2014-10-29 13:44 ` Karl Palsson
2014-10-29 14:02 ` Max Schwarz
2014-10-29 14:34 ` NEO-Technologies / Julien CHAUVEAU [this message]
2014-10-29 15:05 ` Karl Palsson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=5450FAF3.2010208@neo-technologies.fr \
--to=julien.chauveau@neo-technologies.fr \
--cc=addy.ke@rock-chips.com \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=galak@codeaurora.org \
--cc=heiko@sntech.de \
--cc=ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk \
--cc=karlp@tweak.net.au \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=max.schwarz@online.de \
--cc=pawel.moll@arm.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=wsa@the-dreams.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox