[i2c] Is review of AT91 patch pending?

[arasv at magtech.com.au]

>> > > I posted a patch för AT91 several months ago, to make the current
>> > > bus driver interrupt driven instead of using polling.
>> > > 	http://lists.lm-sensors.org/pipermail/i2c/2007-June/001425.html
>> > > Unfortunately no one has rewieved it yet.  :-(   I'm wondering if
>> > > it's still pending? It would be nice to have it merged in the
>> > > next merge window...
>> >
>> > I wanted to continue to help with this, but I couldn't find the
>> > time.  Just in case there was anyone still waiting on me... please
>> > don't.  I hope you will find someone who actually has the hardware
>> > to continue the review from here.  I'm sorry.
>>
>> Do we really want to try fixing the i2c-at91 driver at all? David
>> Brownell and Aras Vaichas seem to believe that there is no way that
>> it can be made completely reliable due to hardware issues, and that
>> using the generic i2c-gpio driver is the way to go on these systems.
>
> Hi
> Well, it's correct that the AT91 driver never will be 100% reliable (on
> AT91RM9200 that is). However, with my patch, support it's *WAY* more
> reliable than with the one already in mainline.

For me to feel comfortable to release the kernel in our product, the driver
would have to be 100% reliable, not just "WAY more". We use the i2c bus
extensively for configuration and IO, it has to be 100% reliable otherwise we
lose customer confidence.

We do implement a crc-32 on all EEPROM reads/writes, but there is no CRC
option on other i2c peripheral reads and writes. e.g. like a GPIO port
expander.


> If i2c-gpio is the way
> to go then the AT91 driver already present in the kernel should be
> removed too.

I was thinking that too. Whatever the solution is, it has to be 100% perfect
and reliable.

One advantage of i2c-gpio is that it is possible to have multiple i2c buses,
which is something we might be looking to do for our products.


Aras


______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 
______________________________________________________________________