On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 04:35:21PM +0100, Voss, Nikolaus wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > > +#include <mach/at91_twi.h>
> > > +#include <mach/board.h>
> > > +#include <mach/cpu.h>
> >
> > avoid including <mach/*> on drivers.
>
> Should I move at91_twi.h to include/linux (omap does it like this,
> other use the mach-include)?
maybe, is at91_twi.h some sort of platform_data ? there's
<linux/platform_data/...> for that.
> > > + if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXCOMP) {
> > > + at91_disable_twi_interrupts(dev);
> > > + dev->transfer_status = status;
> > > + complete(&dev->cmd_complete);
> > > + }
> > > + else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
> > > + at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
> > > + }
> > > + else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXRDY) {
> > > + at91_twi_write_next_byte(dev);
> > > + }
> > > + else {
> > > + return IRQ_NONE;
> >
> > coding style is wrong. Also, are those IRQ events really mutually exclusive ??
>
> These are indeed mutually exclusive (semantically).
so you couldn't have AT91_TWI_TXCOMP and AT91_TWI_RXRDY set when you
read irqstatus ?
--
balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
