linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 32/60] i2c: mv64xxx: reword according to newest specification

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <7szxutsq35uaydvbo6bzrpsvnx765de7ps3kpvzs3b4ubczq6x@weaxji5u2p7c>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2024 00:11:16 +0200
From: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
Cc: linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, 
	Gregory CLEMENT <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 32/60] i2c: mv64xxx: reword according to newest
 specification

Hi Wolfram,

On Sat, Jul 06, 2024 at 01:20:32PM GMT, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Change the wording of this driver wrt. the newest I2C v7 and SMBus 3.2
> specifications and replace "master/slave" with more appropriate terms.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
> ---
>  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c | 12 ++++++------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c
> index dc160cbc3155..29f94efedf60 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c
> @@ -89,8 +89,8 @@ enum {
>  	MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_RESTART,
>  	MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_ADDR_1_ACK,
>  	MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_ADDR_2_ACK,
> -	MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_SLAVE_ACK,
> -	MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_SLAVE_DATA,
> +	MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_TARGET_ACK,
> +	MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_TARGET_DATA,

I searched online for the datasheet but couldn't find it. It
would be helpful to know if the SLAVE naming comes from the
datasheet or if it is arbitrary.

If it originates from the hardware specifications, I suggest
keeping the term "SLAVE."

If anyone can share the datasheet, I would be happy to review it
myself.

Jean and Gregory, could you please check and provide your ack
here?

Thanks,
Andi