Re: [PATCH 1/2] omap i2c: make errata 1.153 workaround a separate function

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Alexander Shishkin said the following on 12/17/2009 06:18 PM:
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 08:36:30 +0530, Menon, Nishanth wrote:
Alexander Shishkin said the following on 12/16/2009 07:32 PM:
This is to avoid insanely long lines and levels of indentation.

Signed-off-by: Alexander Shishkin <virtuoso@xxxxxxxxx>
CC: linux-i2c@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
CC: linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
---
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c |   43 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
index 75bf3ad..ad8242a 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
@@ -671,6 +671,27 @@ omap_i2c_rev1_isr(int this_irq, void *dev_id)
#define omap_i2c_rev1_isr		NULL
#endif
+/*
+ * OMAP3430 Errata 1.153: When an XRDY/XDR is hit, wait for XUDF before writing
+ * data to DATA_REG. Otherwise some data bytes can be lost while transferring
+ * them from the memory to the I2C interface.
+ */
+static int omap3430_workaround(struct omap_i2c_dev *dev, u16 *stat, int *err)
note, though this is identified as being part of 3430, it is not
really restricted to 3430 alone
we might want to rename this as errata_omap3_1p153() perhaps?

Ok, I don't see why not.
Thanks..
+{
+	while (!(*stat & OMAP_I2C_STAT_XUDF)) {
+		if (*stat & (OMAP_I2C_STAT_NACK | OMAP_I2C_STAT_AL)) {
+			omap_i2c_ack_stat(dev, *stat & (OMAP_I2C_STAT_XRDY |
+							OMAP_I2C_STAT_XDR));
+			*err |= OMAP_I2C_STAT_XUDF;
+			return -1;
+		}
+		cpu_relax();
+		*stat = omap_i2c_read_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_STAT_REG);
+	}
+
+	return 0;
+}
wonder if using an inline might help throw away the function call
overhead (considering it is used only once)?

objdump -S says it's implicitly inlined already. I actually had in mind
the conversation about generalizing the features/erratas for chips/IPs
and that somehow stopped me from explicitly inlining this. Do you think
it makes sense (for the next version of this patchset) to explicitly
inline this?
I guess that might allow folks to realize that without objdump -S ;)
[...]

regards,
Nishanth Menon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux GPIO]     [Linux SPI]     [Linux Hardward Monitoring]     [LM Sensors]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Media]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux