Re: [PATCH 64/64] i2c: reword i2c_algorithm in drivers according to newest specification

2024-04-02 Thread Linus Walleij
On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 2:27 PM Wolfram Sang wrote: > Match the wording in i2c_algorithm in I2C drivers wrt. the newest I2C > v7, SMBus 3.2, I3C specifications and replace "master/slave" with more > appropriate terms. For some drivers, this means no more conversions are > needed. For the others

Re: [PATCH 64/64] i2c: reword i2c_algorithm in drivers according to newest specification

2024-03-25 Thread Oleksij Rempel
On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 02:25:57PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > Match the wording in i2c_algorithm in I2C drivers wrt. the newest I2C > v7, SMBus 3.2, I3C specifications and replace "master/slave" with more > appropriate terms. For some drivers, this means no more conversions are > needed. For the

Re: [PATCH 64/64] i2c: reword i2c_algorithm in drivers according to newest specification

2024-03-25 Thread Jarkko Nikula
On 3/22/24 3:25 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote: Match the wording in i2c_algorithm in I2C drivers wrt. the newest I2C v7, SMBus 3.2, I3C specifications and replace "master/slave" with more appropriate terms. For some drivers, this means no more conversions are needed. For the others more work needs to

Re: [PATCH 64/64] i2c: reword i2c_algorithm in drivers according to newest specification

2024-03-22 Thread Wolfram Sang
> Kind of odd though to change function names but not parameter names of > those very same functions. Ouch, this is definitely a valid point. Seems like this series will need a respin after all. Will wait for further comments, though. Thanks! signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: [PATCH 64/64] i2c: reword i2c_algorithm in drivers according to newest specification

2024-03-22 Thread Guenter Roeck
On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 9:47 AM Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > Acked-by: Nicolas Ferre # for at91 > > Probably file names themselves will need some care, in a second time. > > Totally true. I am aware of that. But one step after the other... > Kind of odd though to change function names but not

Re: [PATCH 64/64] i2c: reword i2c_algorithm in drivers according to newest specification

2024-03-22 Thread Wolfram Sang
> Acked-by: Nicolas Ferre # for at91 > Probably file names themselves will need some care, in a second time. Totally true. I am aware of that. But one step after the other... signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: [PATCH 64/64] i2c: reword i2c_algorithm in drivers according to newest specification

2024-03-22 Thread Nicolas Ferre
On 22/03/2024 at 14:25, Wolfram Sang wrote: EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe Match the wording in i2c_algorithm in I2C drivers wrt. the newest I2C v7, SMBus 3.2, I3C specifications and replace "master/slave" with more appropriate terms.

Re: [PATCH 64/64] i2c: reword i2c_algorithm in drivers according to newest specification

2024-03-22 Thread Bjorn Andersson
On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 02:25:57PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > Match the wording in i2c_algorithm in I2C drivers wrt. the newest I2C > v7, SMBus 3.2, I3C specifications and replace "master/slave" with more > appropriate terms. For some drivers, this means no more conversions are > needed. For the

[PATCH 64/64] i2c: reword i2c_algorithm in drivers according to newest specification

2024-03-22 Thread Wolfram Sang
Match the wording in i2c_algorithm in I2C drivers wrt. the newest I2C v7, SMBus 3.2, I3C specifications and replace "master/slave" with more appropriate terms. For some drivers, this means no more conversions are needed. For the others more work needs to be done but this will be performed