[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CABXOdTedz9wRKo=3o4b6VYSi=G1-GJ7dVCv5ETdbqAa_K7yvkQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 17:54:30 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <groeck@...gle.com>
To: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
Cc: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@...labora.com>,
Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>,
Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] platform/chrome: cros_ec_proto: check for missing EC_CMD_HOST_EVENT_GET_WAKE_MASK
On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 5:50 PM Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 5:43 PM Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org> wrote:
> > unless I got
> > refactor cros_ec_get_host_event_wake_mask() to use
> > cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status() instead of send_command(). I'm actually not
> > sure why we don't do that, now that I think about it...
>
> Ah, that would appear to be recursion (cros_ec_query_all() ->
> cros_ec_get_host_event_wake_mask() -> cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status() -> ...
> cros_ec_query_all()), although that could only happen if the first
> cros_ec_query_all() doesn't initialize 'proto_version' to something
> besides EC_PROTO_VERSION_UNKNOWN. That is only possible if the EC
> reports '0' back to us.
>
> I might skip out on that particular refactor for the moment.
>
Agreed, better not touch that. As for the order of changes, I agree
that they are independent. Best approach might be to submit yours, and
then we can clean up things a bit more later after my series is in the
tree.
Thanks,
Guenter
> Brian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists