On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 06:46:19PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 11:40:06AM -0500, Patrick Williams wrote: > > Add support for emulating the following EEPROMs: > > * 24c01 - 1024 bit > > * 24c128 - 128k bit > > * 24c256 - 256k bit > > * 24c512 - 512k bit > > > > The flag bits in the device id were shifted up 1 bit to make > > room for saving the 24c512's size. 24c512 uses the full 16-bit > > address space of a 2-byte addressable EEPROM. > > > > Signed-off-by: Patrick Williams <alpawi@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Do you really need them or is it just nice to have? > > I am undecided. I definately don't want all the EEPROM types which > exist, but the full 16 bit address range makes sense... > > More opinions welcome. > I don't remember exactly which ones we needed (and I am no longer at Amazon), but it was pretty trivial to add them all to the table so I went ahead and did it. As long as we had one of the 2-byte addressable EEPROMs, anything else necessary could be handleded as a small out-of-tree patch. -- Patrick Williams
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
