On Mon, Jul 06, 2020 at 08:26:43AM +0200, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> We need to write DW_IC_ENABLE_ENABLE (1 << 0) to the register to enable,
> but instead we were writing true. This happens to work, but is quite
> unusual. Make the code more readable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware.c | 7 +++++--
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Applied, thanks
Sascha
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware.c
> index 33f89148f0cc..bb9a0b7c4ad4 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware.c
> @@ -121,6 +121,8 @@ static inline struct dw_i2c_dev *to_dw_i2c_dev(struct i2c_adapter *a)
>
> static void i2c_dw_enable(struct dw_i2c_dev *dw, bool enable)
> {
> + u32 reg = 0;
> +
> /*
> * This subrotine is an implementation of an algorithm
> * described in "Cyclone V Hard Processor System Technical
> @@ -128,12 +130,13 @@ static void i2c_dw_enable(struct dw_i2c_dev *dw, bool enable)
> */
> int timeout = MAX_T_POLL_COUNT;
>
> - enable = enable ? DW_IC_ENABLE_ENABLE : 0;
> + if (enable)
> + reg |= DW_IC_ENABLE_ENABLE;
>
> do {
> uint32_t ic_enable_status;
>
> - writel(enable, dw->base + DW_IC_ENABLE);
> + writel(reg, dw->base + DW_IC_ENABLE);
>
> ic_enable_status = readl(dw->base + DW_IC_ENABLE_STATUS);
> if ((ic_enable_status & DW_IC_ENABLE_STATUS_IC_EN) == enable)
> --
> 2.27.0
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> barebox mailing list
> barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
>
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
