On 25 January 2013 14:45, Wolfram Sang <w.sang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 04:06:37PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> +static int i2c_generic_recovery(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>> +{
>> + struct i2c_bus_recovery_info *bri = adap->bus_recovery_info;
>> + int i = 0, val = 1, ret = 0;
>> +
>> + if (bri->prepare_recovery)
>> + bri->prepare_recovery(bri);
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * By this time SCL is high, as we need to give 9 falling-rising edges
>> + */
>> + while (i++ < RECOVERY_CLK_CNT * 2) {
>> + /* SCL shouldn't be low here */
>> + if (val && !bri->get_scl(adap)) {
>> + dev_err(&adap->dev, "SCL is stuck Low exit recovery\n");
>> + ret = -EBUSY;
>> + goto unprepare;
>> + }
>> +
>> + val = !val;
>> + bri->set_scl(adap, val);
>> + ndelay(clk_delay);
>> +
>> + /* break if sda got high, check only when scl line is high */
>> + if (bri->get_sda && val)
>> + if (bri->get_sda(adap))
>> + break;
>
> Didn't we agree to move the SDA check before the SCL setting?
Yes. There was a check for SCL (separately) before this loop. I got that into
this loop to save on redundant code. And now, after sending a complete clock,
we first check sda, then go to next iteration of loop and check scl.
Over that, this routine is a modified a bit again, due to Uwe's comment.
Wait for v10. You would get that in 2 mins :)
BTW, all other comments are accepted.
--
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
