i2c bit bashing adapter number allocation (fwd)
Mark D. Studebaker
mds at paradyne.com
Tue Feb 18 03:52:24 CET 2003
done. We didn't have OMAHA in CVS so now we have both.
Cam Mayor wrote:
> Thank you, Mark! I'm not sure if you got the number I want to add - the
> OMAHA listing was an example i took from the linux-arm code. The number i
> wanted to add is given below (and is also included in a patch against
> linux-2.4.19-rmk5 (and 6) on the arm-linux maintenance site). Please add it
> in if this isn't the number you added. (the omaha one is also valid, but i
> don't maintain it)
> #define I2C_HW_B_GUIDE 0x15 /* Guide bit-basher */
> ps. Do you know where Simon Vogel went? Has he disappeared?
> On Sunday 16 February 2003 18:36, Mark D. Studebaker wrote:
>>I checked your ID into i2c CVS.
>>It will eventually get submitted to the kernel or feel free to include it
>>in one of your patches. mds
>>Frodo Looijaard wrote:
>>>Cam Mayor wrote:
>>>>From cmayor at iders.ca Wed Jan 29 01:25:05 2003
> [headers snip]
>>>After lots of digging, I found a lead to the answer to where to find an
>>>answer in the place i should have looked but didn't remember - the
>>>Simon, Frodo, do you have an opinion on where i should submit the
>>>On Tuesday 28 January 2003 17:34, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>>>On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 05:22:17PM -0600, Cam Mayor wrote:
>>>>>In the file ./include/linux/i2c-id.h
>>>>>there is a list of bit-algorithm adapters and their associated
>>>>> #define I2C_HW_B_OMAHA 0x14 /* Omaha I2C interface
>>>>>Are the numbers allocated in a first-come-first-serve (or
>>>>>first-to-propagate-patch-gets-it), or are they allocated in a more
>>>>>bureaucratic way? I see nothing listed in ./Documentation/i2c about
>>>>>this, and i wish to add our hardware to the list.
>>>>I have no idea; there appears to be no documented method for these IDs.
>>>I suspect this device will only be used for ARM linux, as it is
>>>bit-bashed from an ARM processor. However, i don't want to have to
>>>continually be patching the device number.
>>>Russell, it looks like at least two of these allocations are present in
>>>the 2.4.19-rmk5 patch, so perhaps i should just submit this patch to you.
>>>I've added the two I2C maintainers to the mail to see if they have an
>>>opinion on whether i should submit the one-line patch to them or to
>>>submit it with the rest of the i2c code that i'm going to submit to the
More information about the lm-sensors