On 7/8/20 5:23 PM, Raviteja Narayanam wrote: > Hi Marek, Hi, [...] >>> So, this local_irq_save()/local_irq_restore() is not related to >>> exclusive access in the driver (xiic_process vs xiic_start), but to supply the >> byte count to controller before it completes transmitting START and slave >> address. >> >> But then shouldn't the XIIC IP be fixed / extended with support for such an >> atomic update instead ? > > I have started communicating with the hardware team on why the IP behavior is like this. Any news from the hardware team ? [...]
