Because a 'fallthrough' was refactored away, the order of 'case'
statements can be sorted better now to ease understanding the flow of
events.
Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/i2c/i2c-slave-testunit.c | 16 ++++++++--------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-slave-testunit.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-slave-testunit.c
index 4c550306f3ec..be1d2e900aef 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-slave-testunit.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-slave-testunit.c
@@ -94,6 +94,14 @@ static int i2c_slave_testunit_slave_cb(struct i2c_client *client,
int ret = 0;
switch (event) {
+ case I2C_SLAVE_WRITE_REQUESTED:
+ if (test_bit(TU_FLAG_IN_PROCESS, &tu->flags))
+ return -EBUSY;
+
+ memset(tu->regs, 0, TU_NUM_REGS);
+ tu->reg_idx = 0;
+ break;
+
case I2C_SLAVE_WRITE_RECEIVED:
if (test_bit(TU_FLAG_IN_PROCESS, &tu->flags))
return -EBUSY;
@@ -127,14 +135,6 @@ static int i2c_slave_testunit_slave_cb(struct i2c_client *client,
tu->reg_idx = 0;
break;
- case I2C_SLAVE_WRITE_REQUESTED:
- if (test_bit(TU_FLAG_IN_PROCESS, &tu->flags))
- return -EBUSY;
-
- memset(tu->regs, 0, TU_NUM_REGS);
- tu->reg_idx = 0;
- break;
-
case I2C_SLAVE_READ_PROCESSED:
if (is_proc_call && tu->regs[TU_REG_DATAH])
tu->regs[TU_REG_DATAH]--;
--
2.43.0
