[U-Boot] I2C on iMX25

[Stefano Babic <sbabic@denx.de>]

On 24/09/2012 13:05, Beno?t Th?baudeau wrote:

>> But this seems the right solution. The mxc_get_clk() gets as
>> parameter
>> an enum representing a peripheral or a special clock name, valid for
>> a
>> SOC. The driver should use the peripheral name.
> 
> Yes and no. The best would be to add a clock abstraction function
> imx_get_i2cclk(), like what exists for UART. This is what I did.

However, this duplicates the interface because we have a mxc_get_clk()
and a function names for each peripheral. We have then a plethora of new
functions, one for each peripheral, and all SOCs must implement them to
be consistent.

I prefer to have only one function, available for all SOCs. Everybody
who starts with a new iMX SOC then knows that he must implement
mxc_get_clk(), and that is all.


>> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx5/clock.c
>> b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx5/clock.c
>> index c67c3cf..8fa737a 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx5/clock.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/mx5/clock.c
>> @@ -482,6 +482,7 @@ unsigned int mxc_get_clock(enum mxc_clock clk)
>>         case MXC_IPG_CLK:
>>                 return get_ipg_clk();
>>         case MXC_IPG_PERCLK:
>> +       case MXC_I2C_CLK:
>>                 return get_ipg_per_clk();
>>         case MXC_UART_CLK:
>>                 return get_uart_clk();
>>
>>
>> and updating the mxc_i2c driver to follow the same rule.
> 
> That can be a good solution. What do you think about my imx_get_i2cclk()?
> 

My preference goes to not add it.

Regards,
Stefano

-- 
=====================================================================
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
Phone: +49-8142-66989-53 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: sbabic at denx.de
=====================================================================