Hi Wolfram,
On Tue, Nov 30, 2021 at 10:38:16AM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> The log messages talk about 'bus recovery' while it is not a bus
> recovery with 9 pulses but merely a controller reset. Controller resets
> are not worth log messages. The 'bus busy' message should be emitted by
> upper layers, a busy bus may be expectected in some cases.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> Alain, do you agree? Only compile tested.
Yes I fully agree with that, thanks for doing that.
2 minor points:
- s/expectected/expected, within the commit log
- looking at this area of code again, it appears that the function stm32f7_i2c_release_bus
is ALWAYS returning 0. So it should actually be a void function. I thus
propose, if you agree with that, that I propose, and apply a patch PRIOR to your/this patch
to change that and remove the error checking of the stm32f7_i2c_release_bus function since it is useless.
Is that fine for you ?
Alain
>
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-stm32f7.c | 8 +-------
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-stm32f7.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-stm32f7.c
> index b9b19a2a2ffa..e0e7d0001cbc 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-stm32f7.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-stm32f7.c
> @@ -832,8 +832,6 @@ static int stm32f7_i2c_release_bus(struct i2c_adapter *i2c_adap)
> {
> struct stm32f7_i2c_dev *i2c_dev = i2c_get_adapdata(i2c_adap);
>
> - dev_info(i2c_dev->dev, "Trying to recover bus\n");
> -
> stm32f7_i2c_clr_bits(i2c_dev->base + STM32F7_I2C_CR1,
> STM32F7_I2C_CR1_PE);
>
> @@ -854,13 +852,9 @@ static int stm32f7_i2c_wait_free_bus(struct stm32f7_i2c_dev *i2c_dev)
> if (!ret)
> return 0;
>
> - dev_info(i2c_dev->dev, "bus busy\n");
> -
> ret = stm32f7_i2c_release_bus(&i2c_dev->adap);
> - if (ret) {
> - dev_err(i2c_dev->dev, "Failed to recover the bus (%d)\n", ret);
> + if (ret)
> return ret;
> - }
>
> return -EBUSY;
> }
> --
> 2.30.2
>
