[En-Nut-Discussion] Missing possibility in the I2CBUS API
ulrich.prinz at googlemail.com
Fri May 3 11:58:58 CEST 2013
I gign't want to prohibit any work on the existing function set, but I
had my daubts that it could be realized that easy. I know that, at
least for AT81SAM and STM32 a lot of CPU specific things are used to
use as much hardware protocol handling as possible to keep code fast,
small and easy. I remember that AT91SAM has support for SMBus and
PMBus that can be enabled with a flag, but I remember that the errata
sheet was very long at that section.
So I still have my doubts that it can be realized in an easy way...
2013/5/3 Harald Kipp <harald.kipp at egnite.de>:
> Hi Ulrich,
> On 29.04.2013 16:20, Ulrich Prinz wrote:
>> I would not touch the fine working I2C system for some dump devices
>> where again some chip engineers didn't read the spec. So preferred
>> solution would be to buy a different chip that works according I2C
> Not sure, if you recognized, that Uwe is referring to new i2cbus.h,
> while you are probably referring to the well tested twif.h.
>> functions that TwMasterTransact uses already.
> Nobody wants to change that old, proven API.
More information about the En-Nut-Discussion