[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMpxmJWkioHCLZnJ7LfK3Y4K4jJ2iPMaZ4Kaj_BmAwXqYfW76A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 16:42:04 +0200
From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
To: Peter Korsgaard <peter@...sgaard.com>
Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
linux-i2c <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 0/9] eeprom: at24: at24cs series serial number read
2015-10-21 16:23 GMT+02:00 Peter Korsgaard <peter@...sgaard.com>:
>>>>>> "Bartosz" == Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com> writes:
>
> >> As the serial number is available on a separate i2c address, wouldn't
> >> it be simpler to handle these as special (read only) device variants and
> >> instantiate E.G. a 24c64 (for the normal data) and a 24cs64 (for the
> >> serial)?
> >>
>
> > Hi Peter,
>
> > I wanted to respond that this way we would not be protected from
> > concurrent accesses, but then I saw I didn't actually include any
> > locks in the serial read function - my bad. It needs to be fixed as
> > both memory blocks share the same address pointer.
>
> > I'll resend the series.
>
> But we're protected by the i2c bus lock, right? You do a single
> i2c_transfer to read the serial number.
Why the at24->lock then?
Best regards,
Bartosz Golaszewski
--
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