From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Tolunay Orkun <listmember@orkun.us>
Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2006 15:09:07 -0600
Subject: [U-Boot-Users] Please pull u-boot-83xx.git (I2C rework)
In-Reply-To: <20061128210313.B8FEF352650@atlas.denx.de>
References: <20061128210313.B8FEF352650@atlas.denx.de>
Message-ID: <456CA573.4020103@orkun.us>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Wolfgang Denk wrote:
> In message <1164737878.31193.38.camel@saruman.qstreams.net> you wrote:
>>> Can you be more specific?  These two macros are defined in a variety of ways in 
>>> U-Boot.  Soft I2C is not used on any Freescale parts (AFAIK).
>>>
>> While it's not used on any Freescale evaluation boards, it could
>> certainly be implemented on boards with Freescale CPUs.  I'm not sure
>> why you'd bit-bang I2C if you have nice hardware controllers, but there
> 
> ...because  the  bitbanging  code  is  much  smaller  and  easier  to
> implement and debug than the code that uses the HW controller?
> 
>> may be situations where this makes sense.  On the other hand, I don't
>> know if SOFT_I2C and HARD_I2C can co-exist.
> 
> No, theu=y are exclusive. But it should be possible to select any  of
> these interfaces.

How do we handle the case that there is one hard I2C interface and 
another soft I2C interface (bus) via a pair of GPIO port pins? I have a 
PPC405EP based custom board that has such a case and I was looking 
forward to enabling multiple I2C bus support in U-Boot via both SOFT_I2C 
as well as HARD_I2C defined.

Tolunay