Hi Heiner, On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 18:59:46 +0200, Heiner Kallweit wrote: > Avoid code duplication by calling i801_check_post() from i801_access(). > > Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c | 20 +++++++++----------- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) Overall I like the idea. I only have one question to make sure I'm not missing something. > diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c > index 9061333f2..ecec7a3a8 100644 > --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c > +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c > @@ -432,7 +432,7 @@ static int i801_wait_intr(struct i801_priv *priv) > busy = status & SMBHSTSTS_HOST_BUSY; > status &= STATUS_ERROR_FLAGS | SMBHSTSTS_INTR; > if (!busy && status) > - return status; > + return status & STATUS_ERROR_FLAGS; > } while (time_is_after_eq_jiffies(timeout)); Do I understand correctly that this change isn't really related to the rest of the patch, and could have been done independently? You are filtering out SMBHSTSTS_INTR simply because i801_check_post() will never check it anyway, right? If so, I wonder if that's really something we want to do, as ultimately this adds code with no functional benefit just to be "cleaner". But please correct me if I'm wrong. -- Jean Delvare SUSE L3 Support
