[i2c] [PATCH] Is review of AT91 patch pending?

David Brownell david-b at pacbell.net
Thu Nov 8 04:04:28 CET 2007


On Wednesday 07 November 2007, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> 
> > One suggestion to Haavard (maintainer of i2c-gpio) is to
> > switch the platform data so it can use ndelay() ... that
> > way it can support higher clock rates (e.g. 1Mbit Fm+).
> 
> Yeah, but it would involve changing i2c_algo_bit, and all the other
> drivers that depend on it, since the i2c-gpio driver simply passes the
> udelay parameter along without looking much at it.

Actually you could just add an "ndelay" member to the
"struct i2c_algo_bit_data", and use that in preference
to the current "udelay".  Then patches could switch use
of "udelay" over to "ndelay" and then "udelay" could be
removed.

But you're right, that wouldn't be just an i2c-gpio change.

- Dave




More information about the i2c mailing list