We find that SB700 and SB800 use the same SMBus device ID as SB600, which is
0x4385, instead of the already submitted 0x4395.

Besides removing the wrong SB700 device ID, add SB800 support to kernel, by
renaming the PCI_DEVICE_ID_ATI_IXP600_SMBUS into
PCI_DEVICE_ID_ATI_SBX00_SMBUS.

Signed-off-by: Shane Huang <shane.huang@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

This driver has been broken forever. It depends on i2c-algo-8xx which
has never been in the mainline kernel.

Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>

This is a new I2C bus driver for the TAOS evaluation modules. Developped
and tested on the TAOS TSL2550 EVM.

Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>

Add an ability to utilize the internal SRAM buffer on ICH4
and newer host controllers to speed up execution of block operations.

I've split the code so that it is more clear which block transaction is
performed.

First of all the host controller's type is identified. isich4 is set when
we think that the controller has the internal buffer. Then, before every
block transaction, if isich4 is set, we attempt to enable the E32B bit in
SMBAUXCTL register.

Signed-off-by: Oleg Ryjkov <olegr@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>

Add the SMBus device ID for ATI SB700.

Signed-off-by: Henry Su <Henry.su@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>

Let the drivers specify how many bytes they want to read with
i2c_smbus_read_i2c_block_data(). So far, the block count was
hard-coded to I2C_SMBUS_BLOCK_MAX (32), which did not make much sense.
Many driver authors complained about this before, and I believe it's
about time to fix it. Right now, authors have to do technically stupid
things, such as individual byte reads or full-fledged I2C messaging,
to work around the problem. We do not want to encourage that.

I even found that some bus drivers (e.g. i2c-amd8111) already
implemented I2C block read the "right" way, that is, they didn't
follow the old, broken standard. The fact that it was never noticed
before just shows how little i2c_smbus_read_i2c_block_data() was used,
which isn't that surprising given how broken its prototype was so far.

There are some obvious compatiblity considerations:
* This changes the i2c_smbus_read_i2c_block_data() prototype. Users
  outside the kernel tree will notice at compilation time, and will
  have to update their code.
* User-space has access to i2c_smbus_xfer() directly using i2c-dev, so
  the changed expectations would affect tools such as i2cdump. In order
  to preserve binary compatibility, we give I2C_SMBUS_I2C_BLOCK_DATA
  a new numeric value, and define I2C_SMBUS_I2C_BLOCK_BROKEN with the
  old numeric value. When i2c-dev receives a transaction with the
  old value, it can convert it to the new format on the fly.

Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>

The x1205 driver moved to the RTC subsystem and was significantly
modified since then, so just delete the outdated documentation.

Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>
Cc: Alessandro Zummo <alessandro.zummo@towertech.it>

Convert files within the Documentation directory to UTF-8.

Adrian Bunk:
small additional fixes

Signed-off-by: John Anthony Kazos Jr. <jakj@j-a-k-j.com>
Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>

Make the documentation on how to write and port i2c drivers more in
line with the current state of things:
* i2c-isa is deprecated and soon gone, so stop advertising it.
* Drop many sensors-specific references. Most of them were outdated
  anyway.
* Update the example code to reflect the recent and not-so-recent
  API and coding style preference changes.
* Simplify the example init and cleanup functions.

This should make things less complex to understand for newcomers.

Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>

Make i2c_del_driver a void function, like all other driver removal
functions. It always returned 0 even when errors occured, and nobody
ever actually checked the return value anyway. And we cannot fail
a module removal anyway.

Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org>