Hi Daniel,
On Mon, 30 May 2016 22:07:55 +0800, Daniel Kurtz wrote:
> On Wed, May 25, 2016 at 3:37 PM, Jean Delvare <jdelvare@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > The interrupt handling code makes it look like several status values
> > may be merged together before being processed, while this will never
> > happen. Change from bit-wise OR to simple assignment to make it more
> > obvious and avoid misunderstanding.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare <jdelvare@xxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > Daniel, was there any reason for this bit-wise OR, which I may be
> > missing?
>
> The only thing I can think of is that I didn't want to assume that we
> would always clear priv->status before another interrupt arrived.
Well my question is quite clear: can this actually happen? I can't see
how.
> > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > --- linux-4.5.orig/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c 2016-05-24 11:04:33.169026906 +0200
> > +++ linux-4.5/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c 2016-05-24 11:05:40.564642488 +0200
> > @@ -548,7 +548,7 @@ static irqreturn_t i801_isr(int irq, voi
> > status &= SMBHSTSTS_INTR | STATUS_ERROR_FLAGS;
> > if (status) {
> > outb_p(status, SMBHSTSTS(priv));
> > - priv->status |= status;
> > + priv->status = status;
> > wake_up(&priv->waitq);
> > }
--
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support
--
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
