On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 08:50:41PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote:
> Quoting Ville Syrjala (2017-11-23 19:41:55)
> > From: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > We're supposed to examine msgs[i] and msgs[i+1] to see if they
> > form a pair suitable for an indexed transfer. But in reality
> > we're examining msgs[0] and msgs[1]. Fix this.
> >
> > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: Daniel Kurtz <djkurtz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Chris Wilson <chris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@xxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Sean Paul <seanpaul@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Fixes: 56f9eac05489 ("drm/i915/intel_i2c: use INDEX cycles for i2c read transactions")
> > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <ville.syrjala@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c
> > index eb5827110d8f..165375cbef2f 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c
> > @@ -484,7 +484,7 @@ do_gmbus_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adapter, struct i2c_msg *msgs, int num)
> >
> > for (; i < num; i += inc) {
> > inc = 1;
> > - if (gmbus_is_index_read(msgs, i, num)) {
> > + if (gmbus_is_index_read(&msgs[i], i, num)) {
>
> i is passed to gmbus_is_index_read() and used as an index into msgs. So
> this should be accounted for right?
Doh. Yep, this patch is nonsense.
--
Ville Syrjälä
Intel OTC