Hi
On 11/10/21 7:16 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 04:10:32PM +0200, Jarkko Nikula wrote:
/*
- * Clear irq sources and report transaction result.
+ * Clear remaining irq sources: Completion of last command, errors
irq --> IRQ
of last --> of the last
Ah, worth of changing while changing the line.
+ * and the SMB_ALERT signal. SMB_ALERT status is set after signal
+ * assertion independently is the interrupt generation blocked or not
is --> if ?
hmm, I don't know which one is correct or neither. Or should it be
something like "independently of whether the interrupt generation is
blocked or not"? Grammar polices, please help me :-)
@@ -975,9 +984,13 @@ static void i801_enable_host_notify(struct i2c_adapter *adapter)
if (!(priv->features & FEATURE_HOST_NOTIFY))
return;
- if (!(SMBSLVCMD_HST_NTFY_INTREN & priv->original_slvcmd))
- outb_p(SMBSLVCMD_HST_NTFY_INTREN | priv->original_slvcmd,
- SMBSLVCMD(priv));
+ /*
+ * Enable host notify interrupt and block the generation of interrupt
+ * from the SMB_ALERT signal because the driver does not support
+ * SMBus Alert yet.
does not support ... yet -->
has not supported ... yet
does not support
?
yeah, yet is speculative, perhaps better to drop.
Jarkko
