On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 at 02:27:46 PM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 at 06:56:34 AM, Yao Yuan wrote:
> > On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 at 11:43:27 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > On Wednesday, March 26, 2014 at 04:08:27 AM, Yao Yuan wrote:
> > >
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > > > > + i2c_imx->use_dma = false;
> > > > > > + } else if (i2c_imx_dma_request(i2c_imx,
> > > > > > +(dma_addr_t)phy_addr))
> > >
> > > {
> > >
> > > > > > + dev_info(&pdev->dev,
> > > > > > + "can't request dma chan, faild use dma.
> \n");
> > > > > > + i2c_imx->use_dma = false;
> > > > > > + } else {
> > > > > > + i2c_imx->use_dma = true;
> > > > > > + }
> > > > >
> > > > > Can you not just check if i2c_imx->dma is valid pointer or NULL
> > >
> > > pointer ?
> > >
> > > > > Then you won't need a separate variable, for this purpose ...
> right ?
> > > >
> > > > Sorry and I think what I know is just to check whether it is NULL.
> > > > Then for the second question, maybe there are some other ways, But
> > > > I think it is more tidy and easier understanding for using a
> > > > separate variable, for this purpose.
> > >
> > > You are just wasting space and duplicating data, unless I am wrong.
> >
> > Well, Do you have a better idea? Although I think it's necessary.
>
> I think we disconnected here, sorry. Why can you not use (i2c_imx->dma !=
> NULL) instead of (i2c_imx->use_dma == true) please ?
>
But there are two judge conditions. But only the "i2c_imx->dma", but also whether "i2c_imx_dma_request" success.
"i2c_imx->use_dma == true" be equivalent to "i2c_imx->dma != NULL && !i2c_imx_dma_request()"
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��-��)�� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
