On Thu, Apr 04, 2024 at 07:28:46AM +0200, Tomas Marek wrote: > Hi Sascha, > > Thank you. > > On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 02:13:59PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote: > > Hi Tomas, > > > > Thanks for the patch. I applied it with some minor adjustments. > > > > On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 09:49:09AM +0200, Tomas Marek wrote: > > > +static void i2c_msg_to_efi_op( > > > + const struct efi_i2c_priv *i2c_priv, > > > + const struct i2c_msg *msg, > > > + struct efi_i2c_operation **op) > > > > No need to pass a pointer to a pointer to the array, changed that to > > *op. > > I'm afraid this won't work. The **op was an in/out pointer to the EFI > request operation array. The incremented pointer value was used by > subsequent calls to i2c_msg_to_efi_op(). If a pointer is used instead > of a pointer to a pointer, the op variable in the > i2c_msgs_to_efi_transaction() function isn't modified, and all I2C > messages are now stored in the first item of the EFI operations array. Ah, alright, now I understand the code. I reverted back to your original version. Sascha -- 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 |
