Hi Wolfram,
Thanks for you review,
On 13/02/2014 10:41, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c
>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c
>> @@ -461,8 +461,15 @@ mv64xxx_i2c_do_action(struct mv64xxx_i2c_data *drv_data)
>> case MV64XXX_I2C_ACTION_OFFLOAD_SEND_START:
>> if (!mv64xxx_i2c_offload_msg(drv_data))
>> break;
>> - else
>> + else {
>
> Here you break the coding style...
>
>> drv_data->action = MV64XXX_I2C_ACTION_SEND_START;
>> + /*
>> + * Switch to the standard path, so we finally need to
>> + * prepare the io that have not been done in
>> + * mv64xxx_i2c_execute_msg
>> + */
>> + mv64xxx_i2c_prepare_for_io(drv_data, drv_data->msgs);
>> + }
>
> ... but more importantly, NACK. The code is already hard to follow which
> is the cause for this bug. This snipplet makes the code even harder to
> read, so it needs some simplification IMO. I'll fire up a counterpatch
> in a minute to explain what I mean.
OK, as long as we have a fix for this issue.
I am waiting for your patch.
Thanks,
Gregory
>
>> /* FALLTHRU */
>> case MV64XXX_I2C_ACTION_SEND_START:
>> writel(drv_data->cntl_bits | MV64XXX_I2C_REG_CONTROL_START,
>> --
>> 1.8.1.2
>>
--
Gregory Clement, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
--
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
