Re: i2c and indirect vs. direct config

To: Thor Lancelot Simon <tls%panix.com@localhost>
Subject: Re: i2c and indirect vs. direct config
From: Jason Thorpe <thorpej%me.com@localhost>
Date: Mon, 04 Jun 2018 14:47:40 -0700

On Jun 3, 2018, at 7:44 AM, Jason Thorpe <thorpej%me.com@localhost> wrote:

Actually, I am thinking more of a set of properties that control the behavior of the generic i2c code:

To follow-up, I think I have this sorted out. There were a couple of other issues with how indirect-config was taking place on i2c bus instances, which I fixed as part of this.

I’ll post a more complete follow-up with the details tonight or tomorrow.

-- thorpej

Follow-Ups:
- Re: i2c and indirect vs. direct config
  - From: Jason Thorpe

References:
- Re: i2c and indirect vs. direct config
  - From: Brad Spencer
- Re: i2c and indirect vs. direct config
  - From: Jason Thorpe
- Re: i2c and indirect vs. direct config
  - From: Paul Goyette
- Re: i2c and indirect vs. direct config
  - From: Jason Thorpe
- Re: i2c and indirect vs. direct config
  - From: Paul Goyette
- Re: i2c and indirect vs. direct config
  - From: Paul Goyette
- Re: i2c and indirect vs. direct config
  - From: Jason Thorpe
- Re: i2c and indirect vs. direct config
  - From: Thor Lancelot Simon
- Re: i2c and indirect vs. direct config
  - From: Jason Thorpe

Prev by Date: Re: i2c and indirect vs. direct config
Next by Date: Re: i2c and indirect vs. direct config
Previous by Thread: Re: i2c and indirect vs. direct config
Next by Thread: Re: i2c and indirect vs. direct config
Indexes:

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index