linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6] i2c: rk3x: add i2c support for rk3399 soc

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]

Date:	Fri, 22 Apr 2016 01:00:08 +0300
From:	Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:	David Wu <david.wu@...k-chips.com>
Cc:	Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>,
	Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
	Tao Huang <huangtao@...k-chips.com>,
	Lin Huang <hl@...k-chips.com>, Jianqun Xu <xjq@...k-chips.com>,
	Chris Zhong <zyw@...k-chips.com>,
	Eddie Cai <cf@...k-chips.com>,
	linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Wu <wdc@...k-chips.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] i2c: rk3x: add i2c support for rk3399 soc

On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 4:55 PM, David Wu <david.wu@...k-chips.com> wrote:
> From: David Wu <wdc@...k-chips.com>
>
> - new method to caculate i2c timings for rk3399:
>   There was an timing issue about "repeated start" time at the I2C
>   controller of version0, controller appears to drop SDA at .875x (7/8)
>   programmed clk high. On version 1 of the controller, the rule(.875x)
>   isn't enough to meet tSU;STA
>   requirements on 100k's Standard-mode. To resolve this issue,
>   sda_update_config, start_setup_config and stop_setup_config for I2C
>   timing information are added, new rules are designed to calculate
>   the timing information at new v1.
> - pclk and function clk are separated at rk3399.
> - support i2c highspeed mode: 1.7MHz for rk3399
>

Remove redundant parens in cases like
1. x * (a->b)
2. x = (a + b);

Don't touch pieces of code that are not related (you removed one empty
line without any reason).

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko