> Sorry if this is a repeat, but I have not seen any response, and I'm > not sure the message got to the list, and this is the last remaining > issue for my linux package. So just in case it did not... In doubt, you can check the mailing-list archive: http://archives.andrew.net.au/lm-sensors/ (Your previous post is here: http://archives.andrew.net.au/lm-sensors/msg06465.html) > A simple (I hope) question: > Why doesn't bit_func() in i2c-algo-bit.c not return with the > I2C_FUNC_I2C bit set? > > My chip driver needs to use i2c_master_send() and i2c_master_recv(), > and I cant' find any other functionality bit that makes sense. ?If I > skip the functionality check, it seems to work. ?Did I miss something > in the documentation, that is am I checking for the wrong > functionality bit(s)? I don't know (which is why I didn't answer in the first place, mind you). All I know is that this list of bits returned by i2c-algo-bit:bit_func has been reduced in Linux 2.6. This means that someone took a look and corrected the list to make it better, and did not include I2C_FUNC_I2C. This make me guess that this person knew what he/she was doing. Maybe what you need to check is the I2C_FUNC_SMBUS_EMUL bit. But I don't know much more than you on the subject, so I'm just guessing. Anyway, if bypassing the test make it work for you, I wouldn't bother much. Sorry I cannot help you more. -- Jean Delvare http://www.ensicaen.ismra.fr/~delvare/
