On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 03:10:26PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> Measurements on i.MX1 and i.MX53 have shown that the divider values
> in the datasheets are wrong. the values from first, third and fourth
> column were all measured to be 8 higher than in the datasheet. It
> should be safe to assume that the SoCs between i.MX1 and i.MX53 behave
> the same as the i2c unit is unchanged since the i.MX1.
We may need to check with IC guys? Or you've done?
Thanks
Richard
>
> Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-imx.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-imx.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-imx.c
> index 8d6b504..aabbe31 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-imx.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-imx.c
> @@ -98,22 +98,27 @@
> * Document Number: MC9328MXLRM, Rev. 5.1, 06/2007
> *
> * Duplicated divider values removed from list
> + *
> + * These values (mostly) do not match the ones in the datasheet because
> + * measurements have shown that the values are wrong. This was tested
> + * on i.MX1 and i.MX53, so it shoud be safe to assume that the SoCs in
> + * between behave the same.
> */
>
> static u16 __initdata i2c_clk_div[50][2] = {
> - { 22, 0x20 }, { 24, 0x21 }, { 26, 0x22 }, { 28, 0x23 },
> - { 30, 0x00 }, { 32, 0x24 }, { 36, 0x25 }, { 40, 0x26 },
> - { 42, 0x03 }, { 44, 0x27 }, { 48, 0x28 }, { 52, 0x05 },
> - { 56, 0x29 }, { 60, 0x06 }, { 64, 0x2A }, { 72, 0x2B },
> - { 80, 0x2C }, { 88, 0x09 }, { 96, 0x2D }, { 104, 0x0A },
> - { 112, 0x2E }, { 128, 0x2F }, { 144, 0x0C }, { 160, 0x30 },
> - { 192, 0x31 }, { 224, 0x32 }, { 240, 0x0F }, { 256, 0x33 },
> - { 288, 0x10 }, { 320, 0x34 }, { 384, 0x35 }, { 448, 0x36 },
> - { 480, 0x13 }, { 512, 0x37 }, { 576, 0x14 }, { 640, 0x38 },
> - { 768, 0x39 }, { 896, 0x3A }, { 960, 0x17 }, { 1024, 0x3B },
> - { 1152, 0x18 }, { 1280, 0x3C }, { 1536, 0x3D }, { 1792, 0x3E },
> - { 1920, 0x1B }, { 2048, 0x3F }, { 2304, 0x1C }, { 2560, 0x1D },
> - { 3072, 0x1E }, { 3840, 0x1F }
> + { 30, 0x20 }, { 32, 0x21 }, { 34, 0x22 }, { 36, 0x23 },
> + { 38, 0x00 }, { 40, 0x24 }, { 44, 0x25 }, { 48, 0x26 },
> + { 50, 0x03 }, { 52, 0x27 }, { 56, 0x28 }, { 60, 0x05 },
> + { 64, 0x29 }, { 68, 0x06 }, { 72, 0x2A }, { 80, 0x2B },
> + { 88, 0x2C }, { 96, 0x09 }, { 104, 0x2D }, { 112, 0x0A },
> + { 120, 0x2E }, { 136, 0x2F }, { 152, 0x0C }, { 168, 0x30 },
> + { 200, 0x31 }, { 232, 0x32 }, { 248, 0x0F }, { 264, 0x33 },
> + { 288, 0x10 }, { 328, 0x34 }, { 392, 0x35 }, { 456, 0x36 },
> + { 480, 0x13 }, { 520, 0x37 }, { 576, 0x14 }, { 648, 0x38 },
> + { 776, 0x39 }, { 904, 0x3A }, { 960, 0x17 }, { 1032, 0x3B },
> + { 1152, 0x18 }, { 1288, 0x3C }, { 1544, 0x3D }, { 1800, 0x3E },
> + { 1920, 0x1B }, { 2048, 0x3F }, { 2304, 0x1C }, { 2560, 0x1D },
> + { 3072, 0x1E }, { 3840, 0x1F }
> };
>
> struct imx_i2c_struct {
> --
> 1.7.10
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
