[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3ee59b87-f497-2a26-8f67-10464d55aa84@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2016 10:59:08 +0200
From: Jarkko Nikula <jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com>
To: Tin Huynh <tnhuynh@....com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
Loc Ho <lho@....com>, Thang Nguyen <tqnguyen@....com>,
Phong Vo <pvo@....com>, patches <patches@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] i2c: designware: fix wrong Tx/Rx FIFO for ACPI
On 12/14/2016 05:20 AM, Tin Huynh wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 6:25 PM, Andy Shevchenko
>>> + param = i2c_dw_read_comp_param(dev);
>>> + tx_fifo_depth = ((param >> 16) & 0xff) + 1;
>>> + rx_fifo_depth = ((param >> 8) & 0xff) + 1;
>>> + if (!dev->tx_fifo_depth) {
>>> + dev->tx_fifo_depth = tx_fifo_depth;
>>> + dev->rx_fifo_depth = rx_fifo_depth;
>>> + dev->adapter.nr = id;
>>> + } else if (tx_fifo_depth > 1) {
>>
>> This makes sense now, though I would add a comment here and use >= 2 to
>> reflect datasheet.
>>
>> /*
>> * Choose minimum values between HW and interface
>> * driver provided.
>> */
>>
> I will implement as your comment. However , because adding 1 to the
> value , can i use > 2 or >=3 ?
either > 1 or >= 2 since register value 0x01 from HW means FIFO depth 2
and register value 0x00 is reserved.
--
Jarkko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists