From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755537Ab2HPHZ3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Aug 2012 03:25:29 -0400 Received: from hqemgate04.nvidia.com ([216.228.121.35]:3275 "EHLO hqemgate04.nvidia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751606Ab2HPHZ0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Aug 2012 03:25:26 -0400 X-PGP-Universal: processed; by hqnvupgp06.nvidia.com on Thu, 16 Aug 2012 00:25:24 -0700 Message-ID: <502C9C4F.8090300@nvidia.com> Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 12:37:59 +0530 From: Laxman Dewangan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101208 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stephen Warren , "w.sang@pengutronix.de" CC: "khali@linux-fr.org" , Stephen Warren , "olof@lixom.net" , "linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: tegra: I2_M_NOSTART functionality not supported in Tegra20 References: <1344935949-26709-1-git-send-email-ldewangan@nvidia.com> <502A817C.4000601@wwwdotorg.org> In-Reply-To: <502A817C.4000601@wwwdotorg.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 14 August 2012 10:19 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: > On 08/14/2012 03:19 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote: >> Tegra20 i2c controller does not support the continue transfer >> which implements the I2C_M_NOSTART functionality of i2c >> protocol mangling. >> Removing the I2C_M_NOSTART functionality for Tegra20. >> >> Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan >> Reported-by: Stephen Warren > Tested-by: Stephen Warren > > Note that if I take Laxman's I2C driver clock patches through the Tegra > tree, and Wolfram takes this patch through the I2C tree, there will be a > very slight conflict, since adjacent lines are touched. However, the > resolution is simple and obvious, so I think that's fine. Stephen/Wolfram, I have 2 more change to implement runtime PM and dynamic clock control for fast clock which I have planned for 3.7. I think it will be better if this also goes on same tree where the clock related change are available to avoid the merge conflict.