Skip to content

Conversation

@Hunter1753
Copy link

This adds support for the BL808 i2c bus.

This driver depends on the pinctrl driver to assign IO pins in the device tree to route out the i2c signals

There are currently two PRs open against the bl808/pinctrl-hwrng (#5 || #6) branch of which one needs to be accepted to be able to correctly route the i2c function to the pins

@Hunter1753 Hunter1753 marked this pull request as draft April 24, 2023 00:06
@Hunter1753 Hunter1753 marked this pull request as ready for review April 24, 2023 00:11
@Danct12
Copy link

Danct12 commented Apr 26, 2023

Tested with Sipeed M1s DOCK using a 20x4 I2C Text Screen and lcdproc.

IMG_20230426_200029

@Hunter1753
Copy link
Author

also tested with ssd1306 screen from python

@alexhorner alexhorner force-pushed the bl808/pinctrl-hwrng branch from ab66f49 to 44707fd Compare May 8, 2023 19:48
@alexhorner alexhorner force-pushed the bl808/pinctrl-hwrng branch 2 times, most recently from b435839 to 24dbff5 Compare May 22, 2023 11:08
@alexhorner
Copy link
Member

Hey Hunter,

It looks like you are in breach of the 80col standard,

Please could you edit your driver to conform to the ouptut of the checkpatch pearl script in the repo?

Also, this is a non-DMA version as far as I remember, right? Would you be happy with this being bl808/i2c-nodma so that we can swap things around as appropriate in the future? There is also the argument that the compatible string could be different for the tree, but that's not something we need to worry about now I don't think. We can think about that later once a DMA version comes around.

Thanks!

@Hunter1753
Copy link
Author

somehow my forcepush closed this PR.

i adressed all but one line for the 80 column limit.
also i am fine with the branch being named i2c-nodma for now

@Hunter1753
Copy link
Author

i now adressed all lines for the 80 column limit.
checkpatch still reports two errors:

SPLIT_STRING: quoted string split across lines L#230
UNNECESSARY_ELSE: else is not generally useful after a break or return L#586

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants