From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E5FFC433DF for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 09:37:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F154206D7 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 09:37:44 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=broadcom.com header.i=@broadcom.com header.b="Ne8qy7BB" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727115AbgGXJhn (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 05:37:43 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:57908 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726182AbgGXJhm (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Jul 2020 05:37:42 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x141.google.com (mail-lf1-x141.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::141]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34570C0619D3 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 02:37:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-x141.google.com with SMTP id b30so4843709lfj.12 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 02:37:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=broadcom.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=5TQWChaGcld1X+jt6TSrRbT5d69VNh8YdsaNVfKXJuY=; b=Ne8qy7BB6Y/7TKH1bliOs0RBd4vcuED8WeR396vymk9sAlufq/RXK9OvvOAOKekoT6 pXymUgec0ISJT7TxLDIWTVDVglo9UcgR20dy/VLWWRY17kxHMlGG60UdnM0I48wQ9jeu fQUfUKlgsF2GuEOdu2DjPttH7ZNLTM7bwMDv0= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=5TQWChaGcld1X+jt6TSrRbT5d69VNh8YdsaNVfKXJuY=; b=kdJ1ZTeK0Y7sTcs2z+TC9fG9kTpn3cnWCqG+zScyMX1UI0Giz/wU8TiApVS11OQu6p U/g0J9F5mrst4AK0ZpGmqS8zya3mQNagY+8FNeq9xv7yQp4+ZHpdjt8VtPPH1CkrQqd2 C9FL1UCtRhGFnCjvSL/2troLjnXFmvJvsZUT39oMj92alcjIiXrcqbFT9smwASsaES9L lLEyiOsdA4sdpHxnmOaHVVyOe8w5IuGOFtxQ6DRLnNrBrR08lvxKFse5kpF3ONEXecE4 rsvHXuogmGJ3KCPidfql8q7WTeWlA0jiEzA3KLjBN0UAK2bmsIcLNJA5iaxwYoEJk72A QU8Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533vQHUV8k/yuOWR5katc/BOkcP2z77GNyRPU8dFko9XDMT0ZCZA cgVBb7S85mRHDjCJvwEmHBFDx39E8bsYkcIG+WBWjw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxFM2by9Dsl4Q00h1MKaIBnGcQKERhBxfp23nVMGa9arHxE0+0yVNbsFcgbMzInjHlHpismO9fhP/Cla8ZD8DI= X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5f81:: with SMTP id r1mr4508456lfe.168.1595583460497; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 02:37:40 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200717090155.10383-1-rayagonda.kokatanur@broadcom.com> <20200717090155.10383-3-rayagonda.kokatanur@broadcom.com> <20200723202053.GD908@ninjato> In-Reply-To: <20200723202053.GD908@ninjato> From: Rayagonda Kokatanur Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:07:28 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] i2c: iproc: add slave pec support To: Wolfram Sang Cc: linux-i2c , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Ray Jui , Scott Branden , BCM Kernel Feedback , Lori Hikichi , Robert Richter , Nishka Dasgupta , Andy Shevchenko , linux-arm Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 1:50 AM Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > + /* Enable partial slave HW PEC support if requested by the client */ > > + iproc_i2c->en_s_pec = !!(slave->flags & I2C_CLIENT_PEC); > > + if (iproc_i2c->en_s_pec) > > + dev_info(iproc_i2c->device, "Enable PEC\n"); > > Where do you set the I2C_CLIENT_PEC flag for the slave? Is your backend > code publicly available? I2C_CLIENT_PEC should be set by backend before calling i2c_slave_register() ie client->flags |= I2C_CLIENT_PEC; ret = i2c_slave_register(client, i2c_slave_eeprom_slave_cb); ------ ------ ------ My backend code is not yet publicly available. > > I may need a second thought here, but I am not sure I2C_CLIENT_PEC is > the right way to enable PEC. Isn't it actually depending on the backend > if PEC is needed? I.e. is the backend an I2C device or an SMBus device? > Yes, it depends on the backend. If backend is SMBUS device and supports PEC then it should set client->flags |= I2C_CLIENT_PEC, before calling i2c_slave_register(), so that the slave bus driver will enable PEC in device. Best regards, Rayagonda