[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 1/2]: Add support for Dallas/Maxim DS1685/1687 RTC

To: Kumba <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2]: Add support for Dallas/Maxim DS1685/1687 RTC
From: Manuel Lauss <>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2011 09:39:37 +0100
Cc: Lars-Peter Clausen <>, Linux MIPS List <>,
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=uBGbesRT3AmxjIYyfe4f/CxTtpcN2dL5g8qt3RbudQM=; b=AYbTuwuFgtVXkDvV3ygAv2N9B/+aNrg5+nKklt0oVpK4JfhAicXEBbF8yekIy13JEy bcEr38uN/SRREP5ba8m/tsMpigba2VJlrMnne06AwwqIl5dgeDoJdNxTSuzoIOwrLDt3 7i8G10lhkLSC2+n/EjhYgcI50uF5+HR+AGx3s=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=UfNthOvxuwZt0J2UeBeXeucz2Q4YRNrM56IMkdXCNF68XoxrQruEWlUT/h81FYlHB4 p0ALoY49dRWgTUMOBoyKIZ+fr4Vttn1cCLv4Bo2VAg9MGiojrVRNQMqP3qrQ4I7TgMIJ 6z6qY7fDM+Ku5on16SCzaVN/GRQTYKGbb2eK0=
In-reply-to: <>
Original-recipient: rfc822;
References: <> <> <> <> <>
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 9:17 AM, Kumba <> wrote:
> On 02/17/2011 02:31, Manuel Lauss wrote:
>> Have a look at i2c-ocores.c:    Basically you use platform_data to specify
>> register spacing on the bus.
>> Manuel
> I think I get most of it here.  i2c-ocores.c defines `struct ocores_i2c`,
> which has regstep in it.  I assume the equivalent to this in the RTC driver
> is going to be ds1685_priv.  But in i2c_ocores.h, `struct
> ocores_i2c_platform_data` is defined, which also carries a regstep.  In
> i2c-ocores.c, this struct becomes *pdata while ocores_i2c becomes *i2c, and
> *i2c is used to access the registers.
> I don't think I have an equivalent to either of these two with the way the
> driver was originally written and how I modified it.  The ds1685_priv kinda
> does both right now.  I assume platform_data is not really defined...I have
> to implement one specific to this RTC driver, giving it specific variables
> that need to be customizable at the platform level, and then set those in
> the machine-specific areas, i.e., somewhere in IP32's platform file.
> Sound correct?



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>