+43
−18
Loading
Gitlab 现已全面支持 git over ssh 与 git over https。通过 HTTPS 访问请配置带有 read_repository / write_repository 权限的 Personal access token。通过 SSH 端口访问请使用 22 端口或 13389 端口。如果使用CAS注册了账户但不知道密码,可以自行至设置中更改;如有其他问题,请发邮件至 service@cra.moe 寻求协助。
On Rockchip I2C the controller drops SDA low slightly too soon to meet the "repeated start" requirements. >From my own experimentation over a number of rates: - controller appears to drop SDA at .875x (7/8) programmed clk high. - controller appears to keep SCL high for 2x programmed clk high. The first rule isn't enough to meet tSU;STA requirements in Standard-mode on the system I tested on. The second rule is probably enough to meet tHD;STA requirements in nearly all cases (especially after accounting for the first), but it doesn't hurt to account for it anyway just in case. Even though the repeated start requirement only need to be accounted for during a small part of the transfer, we'll adjust the timings for the whole transfer to meet it. I believe that adjusting the timings in just the right place to switch things up for repeated start would require several extra interrupts and that doesn't seem terribly worth it. With this change and worst case rise/fall times, I see 100kHz i2c going to ~85kHz. With slightly optimized rise/fall (800ns / 50ns) I see i2c going to ~89kHz. Fast-mode isn't affected much because tSU;STA is shorter relative to tHD;STA there. As part of this change we needed to account for the SDA falling time. The specification indicates that this should be the same, but we'll follow Designware's lead and add a binding. Note that we deviate from Designware and assign the default SDA falling time to be the same as the SCL falling time, which is incredibly likely. Signed-off-by:Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> [wsa: rebased to i2c/for-next] Signed-off-by:
Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
CRA Git | Maintained and supported by SUSTech CRA and CCSE