From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2013 13:41:54 -0600
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v3 8/9] tegra: i2c: Enable new CONFIG_SYS_I2C
 framework
In-Reply-To: <51F8CB50.4070004@denx.de>
References: <1367668903-29653-1-git-send-email-hs@denx.de>
	<1367668903-29653-9-git-send-email-hs@denx.de>
	<51F6946F.8010500@wwwdotorg.org> <51F740FD.4080505@denx.de>
	<51F81261.7020008@wwwdotorg.org> <51F81B51.6010305@wwwdotorg.org>
	<CAPnjgZ3aVkHX7Ww2LUHRpiwKU6S+sHTtrKuFeJUM7Hb8+f7bxA@mail.gmail.com>
	<51F83104.5090508@wwwdotorg.org>
	<CAPnjgZ3FAR4YB0Bf5zsv=yPUuRD1k-aMGRG6K6PvuzCFwkNZLQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<51F83570.1010909@wwwdotorg.org> <20130731000921.724f5c71@lilith>
	<20130731051821.DDA1C380480@gemini.denx.de>
	<20130731090644.2b4ce215@lilith> <51F8BE73.2010101@denx.de>
	<20130731101636.059ad6de@lilith> <51F8CB50.4070004@denx.de>
Message-ID: <51F96882.4000201@wwwdotorg.org>
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

On 07/31/2013 02:31 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> Am 31.07.2013 10:16, schrieb Albert ARIBAUD:
>> On Wed, 31 Jul 2013 09:36:19 +0200, Heiko Schocher<hs@denx.de>  wrote:
...
>>>> In the present instance, I'd rather we either:
>>>>
>>>> - removed dependency on DT etc. by using "hard-coded" low level I2C
>>>>     reads for those boards that need it (I assume that for each of
>>>> these
>>>>     boards the I2C slave, offset, and length to read are constant)
>>>> in _f
>>>>     phase, or
>>>
>>> But DT is used for initializing the i2c driver in tegra ...
>>
>> Alright, out goes this proposal. Anyway, I didn't like it best. :)
> 
> Yes.
> 
>>>> - parsed the _f phase looking for offending functions or calls which
>>>>     write to .data or .bss and fix them, suffixing them with _f; in
>>>>     essence, that amounts to starting the implementation of my
>>>> suggestion
>>>>     above alongside fixing the issue at hand.
>>>>
>>>> The first approach is rather "let's bring the thing back up first", so
>>>> it does not have my preference, but I would understand the need to
>>>> quickly fix things.
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>>> The second approach seems to be going in the same direction as Heiko's
>>>> proposal of 07:52 +0200, which I thus second provided it is applicable
>>>> to all the boards Wolfgang had in mind.
>>>
>>> Lets do us this step as fixup ;-)
>>
>> Alright too. :)
> 
> Ok.
> 
> @Stephen, Simon: Could anyone from you do this 2 steps?

Sorry, I really can't tell which 2 steps you mean? I don't see any email
in any timezone with minutes==:52...