> > The I2C specs say in 3.1.16 that the recovery procedure should be used > > when SDA is stuck low. So, I do wonder if we should apply the recovery > > after a timeout. Stuck SDA might be one reason for timeout, but there > > may be others... > > This is ancient code. And regarding your question - > Might be it would be reasonable to add call of > i2c_davinci_wait_bus_not_busy() at the end of i2c_davinci_xfer()? > This way we will wait for Bus Free before performing recovery. That might be an improvement, but the generic question still remains: Is a timeout a reason for recovery? SDA stuck low is one reason for a timeout. I have problems making up my mind here between being pragmatic and being in accordance with the specs. > Of course, i2c_davinci_wait_bus_not_busy() has to be fixed first > as proposed by Alexander Sverdlin here: > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/448994/. Okay, good that you said it. So I'll give his patch series priority over this one.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
