On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 09:32:11AM +0100, Jesper Nilsson wrote: > On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 09:07:47AM +0100, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 16, 2021 at 11:09:33PM +0100, Marten Lindahl wrote: > > > > Any reason why not "|= MASTER_ID(i2c->adap.nr)" here instead of more > > > > expensive IO read? It's quite important because your current code will > > > > bitwise-or old I2C slave address with a new one... This should break > > > > during tests with multiple I2C slave devices, shouldn't it? > > > > > > > > > > You are correct. It is better to use the macro instead, and yes, > > > safer too. I only have one device that supports high speed i2c, but > > > I get your point. It could potentially break. > > > > > > > On which HW did you test it? > > > > > > I used an Artpec development board as master and INA230EVM board > > > as slave. > > > > Artpec development board with? What SoC? > > The ARTPEC-line of SoC:s are Axis Communications own ASICs, in the latest iteration > it's a Cortex-53 and includes instances of the exynos5 HSI2C ip. Cool! Good to see that this code is re-used. :) Best regards, Krzysztof
