Re: [PATCH v11 5/8] i2c: fsi: Add transfer implementation

[Eddie James]

On 07/10/2018 02:39 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > Sorry, what do you mean "show up as"? Yes, we could first shift all our
> > addresses in user-space before passing them to the driver, so that the
> > msg->addr field is exactly what the hardware expects already... This would
> > be non-trivial for our users considering all our documentation represents
> > the addresses as the top 7 bits of a byte :(
> Ah, now I understand the whole situation! Good that I asked. But I have
> bad news for you:
>
> msg->addr is 7 bit and LSB aligned. No way around that. This is how
> Linux I2C worked since the beginning. You have to adapt to it.
>
> I know what you mean. Most doumentation I get has the addresses in 8
> bit, i.e. 7 bit address shifted + RW bit. But sorry again, the Linux
> representation is different and all drivers have to adhere to that.
>
> An EEPROM ist at 0x50 in Linux. There is no write addr 0xa0 and read
> addr 0xa1.

OK, I understand! Will test and resend with conforming addressing. 
Thanks for all the feedback!

Eddie

> > > > Indeed, real 10-bit addresses require some additional manipulation of this
> > > > I2C master in order to work. We don't support it right now.
> > > Then you should remove the associated FUNC flag.
> > Ah, but due to the addressing situation, tools like i2cget don't work with
> > our addresses unless the 10 bit flag is specified. For example, we may want
> > to access 0xA0.
> This is a kinda dirty workaround to the above problem. It is even wrong
> because 10-bit addresses look totally different on the wire.
>
> Sorry for the hazzle with the docs, but there is no way around that.