Re: [PATCH v4 0/8] i2c-atr and FPDLink

[Tomi Valkeinen]

On 07/11/2022 13:48, Luca Ceresoli wrote:

> > In fact, I'm thinking that it might be better to just drop the i2c-atr
> > driver, and add the support directly to the FPDlink drivers. But that
> > could mean possibly duplicating the same code for other deser/ser
> > architectures, so I have kept the i2c-atr driver for now.
>
> Indeed I think the ROHM serdes chips do have an address translation
> feature that works pretty much like the TI ones, and the ATR should be
> cleanly reusable across the two brands. The ATR code might be
> simplified to just provide helpers for common code maybe, but I'd
> rather avoid code duplication.

I agree. The reason I'm wondering about this is the fact that the i2c 
slave side (deser) is in a different IC and driver than the i2c master 
side and driver (ser). That makes it quite different from the i2c-mux 
(at least how the i2c-mux exists now).

 Tomi