[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1427355110.7093.1.camel@mm-sol.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2015 09:31:50 +0200
From: "Ivan T. Ivanov" <iivanov@...sol.com>
To: Sricharan R <sricharan@...eaurora.org>
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
agross@...eaurora.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, galak@...eaurora.org,
dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/6] i2c: qup: Add V2 tags support
Hi Sricharan,
On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 11:14 +0530, Sricharan R wrote:
>
> > > + if (msg->flags & I2C_M_RD)
> > > + qup->rx_tag_len = (qup->blocks << 1);
> >
> > here again.
> >
> hmm, why not shift ?
Because it makes reading code harder and because compiler
is smart enough to choose appropriate instruction for
underling CPU architecture.
> > > + else
> > > + qup->rx_tag_len = 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static u32 qup_i2c_xfer_data(struct qup_i2c_dev *qup, int len,
> > > + u8 *buf, int last)
> > > +{
> >
> > I think that xfer is too vague in this case, prefer write or send.
> >
> ok. Will change it to send.
> > > + static u32 val, idx;
> >
> > static? please fix.
> That was intentional. Using to pack tag and data in to one word across
> two calls. So preserving val, idx across calls.
Sorry this is no go! Reorganize the code, please.
Regards,
Ivan
--
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