On 17 February 2018 at 14:00, Linus Walleij <linus.wall...@linaro.org> wrote:
> The tx function of the DDC I2C slave emulation was returning 1
> on all writes resulting in NACK in the I2C bus. Changing it to
> 0 makes the DDC I2C work fine with bit-banged I2C such as the
> versatile I2C.
>
> I guess it was not affecting whatever I2C controller this was
> used with until now, but with the Versatile I2C it surely
> does not work.
>
> Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.wall...@linaro.org>
> ---
> hw/i2c/i2c-ddc.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/hw/i2c/i2c-ddc.c b/hw/i2c/i2c-ddc.c
> index 199dac9e41c1..bec0c91e2dd0 100644
> --- a/hw/i2c/i2c-ddc.c
> +++ b/hw/i2c/i2c-ddc.c
> @@ -259,12 +259,12 @@ static int i2c_ddc_tx(I2CSlave *i2c, uint8_t data)
> s->reg = data;
> s->firstbyte = false;
> DPRINTF("[EDID] Written new pointer: %u\n", data);
> - return 1;
> + return 0;
> }
>
> /* Ignore all writes */
> s->reg++;
> - return 1;
> + return 0;
> }
>
> static void i2c_ddc_init(Object *obj)
> --
> 2.14.3
Reviewed-by: Peter Maydell <peter.mayd...@linaro.org>
Does the guest attempting writes mean that we're missing functionality
that the hardware has? Is it interesting?
PS: I didn't see a cover letter email with this patchset --
if you can send a cover letter with multi-email patchsets that makes
our automated tooling much happier.
thanks
-- PMM
