On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 18:57:09 +0200, Ivo Manca wrote:
> This patch fixes alignment issues introduced by previous patch.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ivo Manca <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> This patch depends on: [PATCH 01/03] i2c-i801: Add basic interrupt support
> --- i2c-i801-nolayout.c 2008-07-07 15:05:21.000000000 +0200
> +++ i2c-i801.c 2008-07-07 15:04:25.000000000 +0200
> @@ -210,24 +210,24 @@ static int i801_transaction(int xact)
> ((temp = i801_get_status(algo_data))
> & I801_HST_STS_MASK_NORM), HZ/2);
> } else {
> - outb_p(xact | I801_START, SMBHSTCNT);
> + outb_p(xact | I801_START, SMBHSTCNT);
>
> - /* We will always wait for a fraction of a second! */
> - do {
> - msleep(1);
> - temp = inb_p(SMBHSTSTS);
> - } while ((temp & SMBHSTSTS_HOST_BUSY) && (timeout++ < MAX_TIMEOUT));
> + /* We will always wait for a fraction of a second! */
> + do {
> + msleep(1);
> + temp = inb_p(SMBHSTSTS);
> + } while ((temp & SMBHSTSTS_HOST_BUSY) && (timeout++ <
> MAX_TIMEOUT));
>
> - /* If the SMBus is still busy, we give up */
> - if (timeout >= MAX_TIMEOUT) {
> - dev_dbg(&I801_dev->dev, "SMBus Timeout!\n");
> - result = -1;
> - /* try to stop the current command */
> - dev_dbg(&I801_dev->dev, "Terminating the current operation\n");
> - outb_p(inb_p(SMBHSTCNT) | SMBHSTCNT_KILL, SMBHSTCNT);
> - msleep(1);
> - outb_p(inb_p(SMBHSTCNT) & (~SMBHSTCNT_KILL), SMBHSTCNT);
> - }
> + /* If the SMBus is still busy, we give up */
> + if (timeout >= MAX_TIMEOUT) {
> + dev_dbg(&I801_dev->dev, "SMBus Timeout!\n");
> + result = -1;
> + /* try to stop the current command */
> + dev_dbg(&I801_dev->dev, "Terminating the current
> operation\n");
> + outb_p(inb_p(SMBHSTCNT) | SMBHSTCNT_KILL, SMBHSTCNT);
> + msleep(1);
> + outb_p(inb_p(SMBHSTCNT) & (~SMBHSTCNT_KILL), SMBHSTCNT);
> + }
> }
>
> if (temp & SMBHSTSTS_FAILED) {
OK. There's no real need to make this a separate patch. In fact I think
your first patch would be easier to read with these alignment issues
fixed, as it makes it easier to figure out what code paths your changes
are replacing. As a matter of fact, I applied this second patch before
reviewing the first one.
--
Jean Delvare
_______________________________________________
i2c mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lm-sensors.org/mailman/listinfo/i2c
