[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53808851.7060308@topic.nl>
Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 13:53:53 +0200
From: Mike Looijmans <mike.looijmans@...ic.nl>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
CC: linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
davinci-linux-open-source@...ux.davincidsp.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c-davinci: Handle signals gracefully
On 05/21/2014 10:17 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>
>>> dev_err(dev->dev, "controller timed out\n");
>>> davinci_i2c_recover_bus(dev);
>>> i2c_davinci_init(dev);
>>> @@ -384,7 +384,6 @@ i2c_davinci_xfer_msg(struct i2c_adapter *adap, struct i2c_msg *msg, int stop)
>>> if (dev->buf_len) {
>>> /* This should be 0 if all bytes were transferred
>>> * or dev->cmd_err denotes an error.
>>> - * A signal may have aborted the transfer.
>>> */
>>> if (r >= 0) {
>>> dev_err(dev->dev, "abnormal termination buf_len=%i\n",
>>> @@ -436,22 +435,24 @@ i2c_davinci_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adap, struct i2c_msg msgs[], int num)
>>> ret = i2c_davinci_wait_bus_not_busy(dev, 1);
>>> if (ret < 0) {
>>> dev_warn(dev->dev, "timeout waiting for bus ready\n");
>>> - return ret;
>>> + goto error;
>>
>> You are fixing the error path here to include the completion? This is a
>> seperate patch IMO.
>
> Is my remark true? I still prefer the seperate patch, but we may also
> simply update the commit message.
Your remarks is correct. All your remarks were. Problem currently is
that I'm not assigned to a project related to the davinci so I cannot
spend time to fix and port it (the actual platform still runs 2.6.37).
Feel free to adap my patch or comments and commit. Or wait a few weeks
for when I have a sponsor to split and update the patch.
--
Mike Looijmans
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists