On jeu., 2017-08-10 at 04:30 -0400, Robert P. J. Day wrote: > On Thu, 10 Aug 2017, Jean Delvare wrote: > > Thanks for the report. I wonder why people always wait for > > announcements of imminent releases to report bugs ;-) Bugs have to > > be fixed anyway, before or after a release doesn't really make a > > difference, as there were other releases before and there will be > > other releases later. Distributions will cherry pick individual > > commits for backport as needed. > > i actually did ask about this very issue last month: > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-i2c&m=150109384702585&w=2 You forgot to Cc me :( > > Back to the bug itself, the fix will clearly slow down the writes > > for some users. I'm not so worried as writing to EEPROMs isn't a > > frequent operation and better safe than sorry. So I can apply it, > > but for the long term I think this is calling for either a command > > line parameter (to let the user decide of the sleep time) or a retry > > loop (this is what the at24 kernel driver is doing.) If anyone wants > > to provide a patch implementing either solution, I'll be happy to > > review it. > > if the patch referred to above still applies cleanly, i can just > submit that later today. i understand that it will slow down writes; > on the other hand, without it, multi-byte writes simply won't work. No need, I already applied a cleaned up version thereof: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/i2c-tools/i2c-tools.git/commit/?id=7c1260bd0ee73c392f8c2a5b32b4b7c118011255 -- Jean Delvare SUSE L3 Support
