From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [RFC] Make i2c probe opt-outable?
Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 12:18:27 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201205181218.29504.vapier@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4FB674CD.8030502@ti.com>
On Friday 18 May 2012 12:11:57 Tom Rini wrote:
> On 05/17/2012 07:48 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Thursday 17 May 2012 14:43:45 Tom Rini wrote:
> >> I'd like to propose making 'i2c probe' be a command that is
> >> opt-out'able. In the Linux Kernel the notion of probing for devices was
> >> abandoned a while ago due to, in short, devices misbehaving when
> >> randomly poked at. Over in omap24xx_i2c land we changed our probe
> >> method a while ago from an attempted read to an attempted write as some
> >> i2c devices would NAK the read. But now with the am33xx SoM family we
> >> have a new issue which is that attempting to write to an address doesn't
> >> immediately issue a NAK so probe sees all addresses as valid and in turn
> >> leaves the bus upset. I've worked around this for now by making
> >> i2c_probe use the read method instead, only on am33xx (so most devices
> >> would be spotted, but the ones that caused the initial change would not
> >> show up). But a possibly better solution is to just make the i2c probe
> >> command not implemented for am33xx (as you don't have to run i2c probe
> >> to try and use your device).
> >
> > i've always seen the "i2c probe" command as a debugging tool, not
> > something that you need to do to make things work. so along those
> > lines, isn't it already optional ? if you don't like it, don't run it
> > :).
>
> Including a command that doesn't work and saying "ah, just don't use
> that" is asking for trouble. I'm going down the "what changed in the IP
> block, really" rat-hole now (since I've got the original test working).
there's plenty of commands in u-boot which are dangerous and should not be run
lightly. i'm not sure we should special case this.
> But still, the kernel decided i2c probing is dangerous/unreliable,
> maybe we should follow, or at least allow boards to follow?
i don't think "dangerous" is quite right, but certainly it's unreliable
because i2c clients are dirt cheap and they aren't required by the protocol to
be terribly sane. plenty of device drivers do probing once they've been told
to connect to a specific address, but that's been gated somewhat.
also, the counter point is that the kernel still *allows* you to probe the
entire i2c bus regardless of it being dangerous. the i2c-tools package is
awesome for doing this sort of thing: probing an entire bus, attempting to
dump register addresses of slaves en mass, etc...
http://www.lm-sensors.org/wiki/I2CTools
personally, i've used the "i2c probe" command before and found it very useful.
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20120518/960c7121/attachment.pgp>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-18 16:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-17 18:43 [U-Boot] [RFC] Make i2c probe opt-outable? Tom Rini
2012-05-18 2:48 ` Mike Frysinger
2012-05-18 16:11 ` Tom Rini
2012-05-18 16:18 ` Mike Frysinger [this message]
2012-05-18 18:26 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-05-18 18:43 ` Tom Rini
2012-05-18 21:52 ` Wolfgang Denk
2012-05-21 16:48 ` Tom Rini
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=201205181218.29504.vapier@gentoo.org \
--to=vapier@gentoo.org \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.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