Hi, On 20 September 2016 at 06:42, Keerthy <a0393...@ti.com> wrote: > > > On Tuesday 20 September 2016 05:23 PM, Simon Glass wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> On 19 September 2016 at 00:17, Keerthy <j-keer...@ti.com> wrote: >>> >>> Add u8 i2c read/write hooks. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Keerthy <j-keer...@ti.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/i2c/i2c-uclass.c | 10 ++++++++++ >>> include/i2c.h | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-uclass.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-uclass.c >>> index dbd3789..6ce5d9a 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-uclass.c >>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-uclass.c >>> @@ -231,6 +231,16 @@ int dm_i2c_reg_write(struct udevice *dev, uint >>> offset, uint value) >>> return dm_i2c_write(dev, offset, &val, 1); >>> } >>> >>> +int dm_i2c_u8_read(struct udevice *dev, uint offset, u8 *val) >>> +{ >>> + return dm_i2c_read(dev, offset, val, 1); >>> +} >>> + >>> +int dm_i2c_u8_write(struct udevice *dev, uint offset, u8 *val) >>> +{ >>> + return dm_i2c_write(dev, offset, val, 1); >>> +} >> >> >> These look almost the same as dm_i2c_reg_read/write(), but IMO those >> are easier to use since they don't require a pointer to be passed. How >> do you intend to use these two new functions? > > > Simon, > > I see a kind of issue in the current implementation of > int dm_i2c_reg_read(struct udevice *dev, uint offset) > int dm_i2c_reg_write(struct udevice *dev, uint offset, uint value) > > In the current set up my need is to read and then write a 1 byte I2C > register. It is best to have consistency with read and write. > In the current case(dm_i2c_reg_read/write) i read an integer and now when i > want to write i need to convert it to an unsigned integer. > > Instead of all this i made a patch which keeps u8 across read and write: > > int dm_i2c_reg_read(struct udevice *dev, uint offset, u8 *val) > returns error/success with the return value and value is passed by reference > in val variable. > > int dm_i2c_reg_write(struct udevice *dev, uint offset, u8 *val) > returns error/success using the return value and the value to be written is > sent in val.
Well I really don't see why you can use the other functions. But if you prefer these, then OK. > > Regards, > Keerthy > > [...] Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot