| Message ID | 127a63594229deca2f63c7393b9bdf17b572163a.1643898531.git.geert+renesas@glider.be |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | ea01b71b07993d5c518496692f476a3c6b5d9786 |
| Headers | show |
| Series | i2c: rcar: Add R-Car S4-8 support | expand |
On Thu, Feb 3, 2022 at 3:33 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be> wrote: > Add support for the I2C Bus Interface on R-Car Gen4 SoCs (e.g. R-Car > S4-8) by matching on a family-specific compatible value. > > While I2C on R-Car Gen4 does support some extra features (Slave Clock > Stretch Select, Fast-mode Plus), for now it is treated the same as I2C Correction: R-Car S4 does not support Fast-mode Plus, so there will be a v2 of this patch, eventually. > on R-Car Gen3. > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be> Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
> > While I2C on R-Car Gen4 does support some extra features (Slave Clock > > Stretch Select, Fast-mode Plus), for now it is treated the same as I2C > > Correction: R-Car S4 does not support Fast-mode Plus, so there will be > a v2 of this patch, eventually. But why? Unless we implement slave clock stretching, we can still keep it at Gen3 level. Which does also not have FM+.
Hi Wolfram, On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 1:35 PM Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> wrote: > > > While I2C on R-Car Gen4 does support some extra features (Slave Clock > > > Stretch Select, Fast-mode Plus), for now it is treated the same as I2C > > > > Correction: R-Car S4 does not support Fast-mode Plus, so there will be > > a v2 of this patch, eventually. > > But why? Unless we implement slave clock stretching, we can still keep > it at Gen3 level. Which does also not have FM+. Don't we want to introduce a family-specific compatible value for R-Car Gen4? At least the SCSS seems to be a new R-Car Gen4 feature common to R-Car S4 and R-Car V3U (yes, the latter is advertised as the first member of the R-Car Gen4 family, so I intend to move it over to renesas,rcar-gen4-* where it makes sense). Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
> Don't we want to introduce a family-specific compatible value for > R-Car Gen4? At least the SCSS seems to be a new R-Car Gen4 feature > common to R-Car S4 and R-Car V3U (yes, the latter is advertised as > the first member of the R-Car Gen4 family, so I intend to move it > over to renesas,rcar-gen4-* where it makes sense). Yeah, sure we want the family compatible. But for now it can point to I2C_RCAR_GEN3, so the patch can stay as is. That is what I was wondering about why a v2 was needed. If we add SCSS, we can update the family compatible data for Gen4 to I2C_RCAR_GEN4. Unless I miss something.
Hi Wolfram, On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 3:43 PM Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> wrote: > > Don't we want to introduce a family-specific compatible value for > > R-Car Gen4? At least the SCSS seems to be a new R-Car Gen4 feature > > common to R-Car S4 and R-Car V3U (yes, the latter is advertised as > > the first member of the R-Car Gen4 family, so I intend to move it > > over to renesas,rcar-gen4-* where it makes sense). > > Yeah, sure we want the family compatible. But for now it can point to > I2C_RCAR_GEN3, so the patch can stay as is. That is what I was wondering > about why a v2 was needed. If we add SCSS, we can update the family > compatible data for Gen4 to I2C_RCAR_GEN4. Unless I miss something. Ah, there's the source of the confusion! ;-) There's a need for a v2 because the patch description says R-Car S4 supports FM+, which is false. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert -- Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. -- Linus Torvalds
On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 03:50:02PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Wolfram, > > On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 3:43 PM Wolfram Sang > <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com> wrote: > > > Don't we want to introduce a family-specific compatible value for > > > R-Car Gen4? At least the SCSS seems to be a new R-Car Gen4 feature > > > common to R-Car S4 and R-Car V3U (yes, the latter is advertised as > > > the first member of the R-Car Gen4 family, so I intend to move it > > > over to renesas,rcar-gen4-* where it makes sense). > > > > Yeah, sure we want the family compatible. But for now it can point to > > I2C_RCAR_GEN3, so the patch can stay as is. That is what I was wondering > > about why a v2 was needed. If we add SCSS, we can update the family > > compatible data for Gen4 to I2C_RCAR_GEN4. Unless I miss something. > > Ah, there's the source of the confusion! ;-) > > There's a need for a v2 because the patch description says R-Car S4 > supports FM+, which is false. Now we got it! :) Well, I can simply remove FM+ from the message when applying? Anyway, with the above fixed: Reviewed-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
On Thu, Feb 03, 2022 at 03:33:17PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Add support for the I2C Bus Interface on R-Car Gen4 SoCs (e.g. R-Car > S4-8) by matching on a family-specific compatible value. > > While I2C on R-Car Gen4 does support some extra features (Slave Clock > Stretch Select, Fast-mode Plus), for now it is treated the same as I2C > on R-Car Gen3. > > Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be> Fixed commit message and applied to for-next, thanks!
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rcar.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rcar.c index f71c730f9838d89c..0db3d755906627d7 100644 --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rcar.c +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rcar.c @@ -1008,6 +1008,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id rcar_i2c_dt_ids[] = { { .compatible = "renesas,rcar-gen1-i2c", .data = (void *)I2C_RCAR_GEN1 }, { .compatible = "renesas,rcar-gen2-i2c", .data = (void *)I2C_RCAR_GEN2 }, { .compatible = "renesas,rcar-gen3-i2c", .data = (void *)I2C_RCAR_GEN3 }, + { .compatible = "renesas,rcar-gen4-i2c", .data = (void *)I2C_RCAR_GEN3 }, {}, }; MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, rcar_i2c_dt_ids);
Add support for the I2C Bus Interface on R-Car Gen4 SoCs (e.g. R-Car S4-8) by matching on a family-specific compatible value. While I2C on R-Car Gen4 does support some extra features (Slave Clock Stretch Select, Fast-mode Plus), for now it is treated the same as I2C on R-Car Gen3. Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be> --- drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-rcar.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)