Hi Greg and Jean
I'm very sorry about my patch submitting policy I hope I will improve in future :)
>
>>+ /* device error - probably missing ACK, from autdetection I2C_QUICK */
>>+ if (data & HST_STS_DEVERR) {
>>+ dev_dbg(&a->dev, "Device error!\n");
>>+ }
>
>
> I don't like this. If this "error" is normal for I2C_QUICK, then don't
> issue any message and return 0 in this case, and issue an *error*, not
> debug, message in the other cases.
Yes this will happen when no-one will respond to I2C_QUICK. If we would return 0;
then i2cdetect would have detected all devices as "present"??? (Or am I missing something? Its quite late
here...When someting will respond to I2C QUICK we would leave the routine more to the top)
>
> As far as I can see, this means adding a second parameter to
> ali1563_transaction, but I don't think this is a problem.
Please can you explain more? Or tomorrow on IRC if you want...
I will remove all noise in future revisions of this patch.
> I'm otherwise fine with your patch, thanks a lot for your great
> investigation work on this.
Thank you, it was nice detective story, so I'm proud that I found all "murders" in our case.
Funny is that I could not take a look to book :)
Before I will create new patch I will send patch to Patrick in extra thread.
Regards
Rudolf
