On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 10:54:22AM +0200, BALATON Zoltan wrote: > On Wed, 13 Jun 2018, David Gibson wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 06, 2018 at 03:31:48PM +0200, BALATON Zoltan wrote: > > > Signed-off-by: BALATON Zoltan > > > --- > > > default-configs/ppc-softmmu.mak | 1 + > > > default-configs/ppcemb-softmmu.mak | 1 + > > > hw/i2c/ppc4xx_i2c.c | 14 +++++++++++++- > > > 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/default-configs/ppc-softmmu.mak b/default-configs/ppc-softmmu.mak > > > index 4d7be45..7d0dc2f 100644 > > > --- a/default-configs/ppc-softmmu.mak > > > +++ b/default-configs/ppc-softmmu.mak > > > @@ -26,6 +26,7 @@ CONFIG_USB_EHCI_SYSBUS=y > > > CONFIG_SM501=y > > > CONFIG_IDE_SII3112=y > > > CONFIG_I2C=y > > > +CONFIG_BITBANG_I2C=y > > > > > > # For Macs > > > CONFIG_MAC=y > > > diff --git a/default-configs/ppcemb-softmmu.mak b/default-configs/ppcemb-softmmu.mak > > > index 67d18b2..37af193 100644 > > > --- a/default-configs/ppcemb-softmmu.mak > > > +++ b/default-configs/ppcemb-softmmu.mak > > > @@ -19,3 +19,4 @@ CONFIG_USB_EHCI_SYSBUS=y > > > CONFIG_SM501=y > > > CONFIG_IDE_SII3112=y > > > CONFIG_I2C=y > > > +CONFIG_BITBANG_I2C=y > > > diff --git a/hw/i2c/ppc4xx_i2c.c b/hw/i2c/ppc4xx_i2c.c > > > index a68b5f7..5806209 100644 > > > --- a/hw/i2c/ppc4xx_i2c.c > > > +++ b/hw/i2c/ppc4xx_i2c.c > > > @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ > > > #include "cpu.h" > > > #include "hw/hw.h" > > > #include "hw/i2c/ppc4xx_i2c.h" > > > +#include "bitbang_i2c.h" > > > > > > #define PPC4xx_I2C_MEM_SIZE 18 > > > > > > @@ -46,7 +47,13 @@ > > > > > > #define IIC_XTCNTLSS_SRST (1 << 0) > > > > > > +#define IIC_DIRECTCNTL_SDAC (1 << 3) > > > +#define IIC_DIRECTCNTL_SCLC (1 << 2) > > > +#define IIC_DIRECTCNTL_MSDA (1 << 1) > > > +#define IIC_DIRECTCNTL_MSCL (1 << 0) > > > + > > > typedef struct { > > > + bitbang_i2c_interface *bitbang; > > > uint8_t mdata; > > > uint8_t lmadr; > > > uint8_t hmadr; > > > @@ -308,7 +315,11 @@ static void ppc4xx_i2c_writeb(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, uint64_t value, > > > i2c->xtcntlss = value; > > > break; > > > case 16: > > > - i2c->directcntl = value & 0x7; > > > + i2c->directcntl = value & (IIC_DIRECTCNTL_SDAC & IIC_DIRECTCNTL_SCLC); > > > + i2c->directcntl |= (value & IIC_DIRECTCNTL_SCLC ? 1 : 0); > > > + bitbang_i2c_set(i2c->bitbang, BITBANG_I2C_SCL, i2c->directcntl & 1); > > > > Shouldn't that use i2c->directcntl & IIC_DIRECTCNTL_MSCL ? > > > > > + i2c->directcntl |= bitbang_i2c_set(i2c->bitbang, BITBANG_I2C_SDA, > > > + (value & IIC_DIRECTCNTL_SDAC) != 0) << 1; > > > > Last expression might be clearer as: > > value & IIC_DIRECTCNTL_SDAC ? IIC_DIRECTCNTL_MSDA : 0 > > I guess this is a matter of taste but to me IIC_DIRECTCNTL_MSDA is a bit > position in the register so I use that when accessing that bit but when I > check for the values of a bit being 0 or 1 I don't use the define which is > for something else, just happens to have value 1 as well. Hmm.. but the bit is being store in i2c->directcntl, which means it can be read back from the register in that position, no? > If this does not explain your question and you think it's better to use > defines here I can change that in next version, please let me know. > > Regards, > BALATON Zoltan > -- David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson