On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 08:50:41PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > Quoting Ville Syrjala (2017-11-23 19:41:55) > > From: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> > > > > We're supposed to examine msgs[i] and msgs[i+1] to see if they > > form a pair suitable for an indexed transfer. But in reality > > we're examining msgs[0] and msgs[1]. Fix this. > > > > Cc: [email protected] > > Cc: Daniel Kurtz <[email protected]> > > Cc: Chris Wilson <[email protected]> > > Cc: Daniel Vetter <[email protected]> > > Cc: Sean Paul <[email protected]> > > Fixes: 56f9eac05489 ("drm/i915/intel_i2c: use INDEX cycles for i2c read > > transactions") > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrjälä <[email protected]> > > --- > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c > > b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c > > index eb5827110d8f..165375cbef2f 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c > > @@ -484,7 +484,7 @@ do_gmbus_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adapter, struct > > i2c_msg *msgs, int num) > > > > for (; i < num; i += inc) { > > inc = 1; > > - if (gmbus_is_index_read(msgs, i, num)) { > > + if (gmbus_is_index_read(&msgs[i], i, num)) { > > i is passed to gmbus_is_index_read() and used as an index into msgs. So > this should be accounted for right?
Doh. Yep, this patch is nonsense. -- Ville Syrjälä Intel OTC _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
