> 1. If wanted in kernel code, have a single scanner in i2c-core > instead. But you finally did not implement that, right? > I2C address space is not that flat and some addresses have > special meanings for 10-bit addressing, high-speed, > routing/multiplexing. A simple scan 0x00-0x7f only gives you half the > picture. True, still both sensors-detect and i2c-detect also do a "flat" scan. > 2. A simple SMBus Quick command may have effect, the most simple i2c > chip is a relay acting on the R/W bit of the address. Some chip at > 0x69 (?) locked the bus in the early days (-99), and I think it > was solved using write, not read address in the bus scan. I wasn't there back to these times, but we now use a quick write command (which, as you know, doesn't really write anything). A quick look at i2c-ibm_iic.c in Linux 2.6.0 shows that they use one-byte read instead. > 3. The ThinkPad issue, corruption on bus scan. While it is a bug on > the EEPROM fw, you well know that somehow this type of issue needs to > be handled. The fewer places to fix the better. The sensors-detect > prog has 24RF08 fix, how about adding that in i2cdetect too? You got a point, we forgot i2c-detect. MDS, is doubling the quickwrite on addresses 0x54-0x57 enough? > 4. The in-module bus scan only outputs to log, the format may not be > uniform cross algorithms. There is i2cdetect. Makes sense too. > I vote for removal of bus scan in all algorithm sources. OK, will do. > > BTW, does i2cdetect work on non-i386 architectures? > > Its pretty straight-forward. If it doesn't work, problem is more > likely in i2c-dev. That's not how I meant it. My point is that I think I remember Greg saying someting about i2c-dev not being portable cross platforms. If I'm not mistaking, i2cdetect relies on i2c-dev. What I mean is that removing in-modules bus scanning might not be accepted if the architectures using these modules are not able to use the new and prefered method, i.e. i2cdetect. I searched my mail archive for Greg's original comment, but couldn't find it. Greg, any chance you could refresh my memory? Thanks. -- Jean Delvare http://www.ensicaen.ismra.fr/~delvare/
