Hi Matthias, On Tue, 2015-05-19 at 16:45 +0200, Matthias Brugger wrote: > 2015-05-18 18:40 GMT+02:00 Eddie Huang <eddie.huang@xxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > Add mediatek MT8173 I2C controller driver. Compare to I2C controller > > of earlier mediatek SoC, MT8173 fix write-then-read limitation, and > > also increase message size to 64kb. > > > > Signed-off-by: Xudong Chen <xudong.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Liguo Zhang <liguo.zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Eddie Huang <eddie.huang@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Acked-by: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mt65xx.c | 94 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ > > 1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mt65xx.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mt65xx.c > > index 7462f05..1ebbf1a 100644 > > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mt65xx.c > > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mt65xx.c > > @@ -33,10 +33,13 @@ > > #include <linux/sched.h> > > #include <linux/slab.h> > > > > +#define I2C_RS_TRANSFER (1 << 4) > > As far as I can see, mt6589 and mt8127 don't have this bit defined in > their datasheets (and most probably others neither). > Is it save to write this bit, although it is not implemented? I think it is safe to write this bit. Since other guys may have the same question, I will modify to write I2C_RS_TRANSFER only when this bit exist. Eddie -- 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
