[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAD=FV=Wc0zXqrciAFWJ8+SfXc63b1q0c9FtVFxD8CbVgHPtePA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2017 10:15:15 -0700
From: Doug Anderson <dianders@...gle.com>
To: Wei-Ning Huang <wnhuang@...omium.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Duncan Laurie <dlaurie@...gle.com>,
Andrew de los Reyes <adlr@...gle.com>,
Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Randall Spangler <rspangler@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cros_ec_i2c: prevent i2c timeout for EC_CMD_FLASH_ERASE
Hi,
On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 9:22 AM, Wei-Ning Huang <wnhuang@...omium.org> wrote:
> From: Wei-Ning Huang <wnhuang@...omium.org>
>
> Some EC chip has larger flash sector size which requires longer erase
> time. During erase the CPU is usually stalled and can't even respond to
> interrupts. We sleep a while to block any EC command from executing
> during the flash erase period.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wei-Ning Huang <wnhuang@...omium.org>
> ---
> drivers/mfd/cros_ec_i2c.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
A few notes:
* I added Randall to the v1 thread, but you dropped him here. When
someone gets CCed to a patch, it's nice to add them to future
versions.
* I added my Reviewed-by to v1. When sending a v2, it's nice to carry
that forward since there were no significant changes from v1 to v2.
* I just talked to Randall, and he has an alternate proposal that
avoids the hardcoded delay. It looks like discussion will carry
forward on the gerrit review. Once Randall is happy then it'd be good
to post a v3.
-Doug
Powered by blists - more mailing lists