On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 12:06:16AM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 07:46:58PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux admin wrote: > > Hi, > > > > This series cleans up the i2c-pxa code via the following changes: > > > > 1. replace i2c_pxa_addr_byte() with the functional equivalent > > i2c_8bit_addr_from_msg(). > > > > 2. removing unnecessary headers, and rearranging those that remain > > in alphabetical order. > > > > 3. rearranging functions in the file to flow better; particularly > > placing the PIO specific functions next to the PIO algorithm > > structure, so all the PIO mode related code is together. This > > eliminates the forward declaration of i2c_pxa_handler(). > > > > 4. group the register bitfield definitions, which were split over two > > separate locations in the file, into a single location, and add > > some definitions for the IBMR register. > > > > 5. always set the 'fm' and 'hs' members for each hardware type; the > > storage for these members is always allocated, we don't need to > > bloat the code (neither runtime, nor in the source) for this. > > > > 6. move definitions private to i2c-pxa out of the platform data > > header; platforms have no business knowing these details. > > > > 7. group all driver-based IDs match (platform and OF) to one common > > location rather than at either end of the file. > > > > 8. fix i2c_pxa_scream_blue_murder()'s log output to be printed on a > > single line as it was intended, rather than being printed one > > entry per line - which makes it difficult to read particularly > > when it has been enabled and you're getting lots of them. Also > > fix decode_bits() output in the same way. > > > > 9. fix i2c_pxa_wait_bus_not_busy() boundary condition, so that a > > coincidental success and timeout results in the function being > > successful rather than failing. (This has never been seen in > > practice, but was spotted while reviewing the code.) > > > > All in all, these changes should have (and have had so far) no > > observable impact on the driver; therefore, I do not see any reason > > to backport any of these changes to stable trees. > > > > This series has been rebased on the linux-i2c for-next branch. > > Applied all to for-next, thanks! I don't see it in the i2c tree yet at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wsa/linux.git which has the top commit for the for-next branch of: 38d357bdc5c6 Merge branch 'i2c/for-current-fixed' into i2c/for-next which contains commits dated after your email. Have you forgotten to merge a branch? -- RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/ FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line in suburbia: sync at 10.2Mbps down 587kbps up
