On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 11:14 AM Rayagonda Kokatanur
<rayagonda.kokatanur@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Iproc supports PEC computation and checking in both Master
> and Slave mode.
>
> This patch adds support for PEC in slave mode.
...
> -#define S_RX_PEC_ERR_SHIFT 29
> +#define S_RX_PEC_ERR_SHIFT 28
> +#define S_RX_PEC_ERR_MASK 0x3
> +#define S_RX_PEC_ERR 0x1
This needs to be explained in the commit message, in particular why
this change makes no regression.
...
> +static int bcm_iproc_smbus_check_slave_pec(struct bcm_iproc_i2c_dev *iproc_i2c,
> + u32 val)
> +{
> + u8 err_status;
> + int ret = 0;
Completely redundant variable.
> + if (!iproc_i2c->en_s_pec)
> + return ret;
return 0;
> + err_status = (u8)((val >> S_RX_PEC_ERR_SHIFT) & S_RX_PEC_ERR_MASK);
Why casting?
> + if (err_status == S_RX_PEC_ERR) {
> + dev_err(iproc_i2c->device, "Slave PEC error\n");
> + ret = -EBADMSG;
return ...
> + }
> +
> + return ret;
return 0;
> +}
...
> + if (rx_status == I2C_SLAVE_RX_END) {
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = bcm_iproc_smbus_check_slave_pec(iproc_i2c,
> + val);
One line looks better.
> + if (!ret)
Why not positive conditional?
> + i2c_slave_event(iproc_i2c->slave,
> + I2C_SLAVE_STOP, &value);
> + else
> + i2c_slave_event(iproc_i2c->slave,
> + I2C_SLAVE_PEC_ERR,
> + &value);
> + }
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
