linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c: add new driver

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20111108154004.GK20728@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com>
Date:	Tue, 8 Nov 2011 17:40:05 +0200
From:	Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>
To:	"Voss, Nikolaus" <N.Voss@...nmann.de>
Cc:	"'balbi@...com'" <balbi@...com>,
	"'linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org'" <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
	"'linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org'" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"'linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org'" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"'ben-linux@...ff.org'" <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
	"'khali@...ux-fr.org'" <khali@...ux-fr.org>,
	"'nicolas.ferre@...el.com'" <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
	"'rmallon@...il.com'" <rmallon@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 2/4] drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-at91.c: add new driver

On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 04:35:21PM +0100, Voss, Nikolaus wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> > > +#include <mach/at91_twi.h>
> > > +#include <mach/board.h>
> > > +#include <mach/cpu.h>
> > 
> > avoid including <mach/*> on drivers.
> 
> Should I move at91_twi.h to include/linux (omap does it like this,
> other use the mach-include)?

maybe, is at91_twi.h some sort of platform_data ? there's
<linux/platform_data/...> for that.

> > > +	if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXCOMP) {
> > > +		at91_disable_twi_interrupts(dev);
> > > +		dev->transfer_status = status;
> > > +		complete(&dev->cmd_complete);
> > > +	}
> > > +	else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_RXRDY) {
> > > +		at91_twi_read_next_byte(dev);
> > > +	}
> > > +	else if (irqstatus & AT91_TWI_TXRDY) {
> > > +		at91_twi_write_next_byte(dev);
> > > +	}
> > > +	else {
> > > +		return IRQ_NONE;
> > 
> > coding style is wrong. Also, are those IRQ events really mutually exclusive ??
> 
> These are indeed mutually exclusive (semantically).

so you couldn't have AT91_TWI_TXCOMP and AT91_TWI_RXRDY set when you
read irqstatus ?

-- 
balbi

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)