> > Please note that I resigned from my position of i2c subsystem
> > maintainer, so I will not handle this. If you think this is important,
> > you'll have to resubmit and Wolfram will decide what he wants to do
> > about it.
>
> OK, I had the impression that the conclusion was that the danger wa
On Tue, 18 Dec 2012, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Julia,
>
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2012 08:45:43 +0200 (CEST), Julia Lawall wrote:
> > I found 6 cases where there are more than 2 messages in the array. I
> > didn't check how many cases where there are two messages but there is
> > something other than one
Hi Julia,
On Thu, 11 Oct 2012 08:45:43 +0200 (CEST), Julia Lawall wrote:
> I found 6 cases where there are more than 2 messages in the array. I
> didn't check how many cases where there are two messages but there is
> something other than one read and one write.
>
> Perhaps a reasonable option w
I found 6 cases where there are more than 2 messages in the array. I
didn't check how many cases where there are two messages but there is
something other than one read and one write.
Perhaps a reasonable option would be to use
I2C_MSG_READ
I2C_MSG_WRITE
I2C_MSG_READ_OP
I2C_MSG_WRITE_OP
The las
Hi Julia,
Em Mon, 8 Oct 2012 10:31:33 +0200 (CEST)
Julia Lawall escreveu:
> I found only 15 uses of I2C_MSG_OP, out of 653 uses of one of the three
> macros. Since I2C_MSG_OP has the complete set of flags, I think it should
> be OK?
>
> One of the uses, in drivers/media/i2c/adv7604.c, is as fo
Em Mon, 8 Oct 2012 10:31:33 +0200 (CEST)
Julia Lawall escreveu:
> I found only 15 uses of I2C_MSG_OP, out of 653 uses of one of the three
> macros. Since I2C_MSG_OP has the complete set of flags, I think it should
> be OK?
>
> One of the uses, in drivers/media/i2c/adv7604.c, is as follows:
>
>
I found only 15 uses of I2C_MSG_OP, out of 653 uses of one of the three
macros. Since I2C_MSG_OP has the complete set of flags, I think it should
be OK?
One of the uses, in drivers/media/i2c/adv7604.c, is as follows:
struct i2c_msg msg[2] = { { client->addr, 0, 1, msgbuf0 },
On 10/08/2012 05:11 AM, Ryan Mallon wrote:
On 08/10/12 12:56, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
Em Sun, 07 Oct 2012 14:51:58 -0700
Joe Perches escreveu:
On Sun, 2012-10-07 at 23:43 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
On Sun, 7 Oct 2012, Joe Perches wrote:
Are READ and WRITE the action names? They are re
On Sun, 7 Oct 2012, Joe Perches wrote:
On Sun, 2012-10-07 at 23:43 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
On Sun, 7 Oct 2012, Joe Perches wrote:
Are READ and WRITE the action names? They are really the important
information in this case.
Yes, most (all?) uses of _READ and _WRITE macros actually
perform
On 08/10/12 12:56, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> Em Sun, 07 Oct 2012 14:51:58 -0700
> Joe Perches escreveu:
>
>> On Sun, 2012-10-07 at 23:43 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
>>> On Sun, 7 Oct 2012, Joe Perches wrote:
> Are READ and WRITE the action names? They are really the important
> infor
Em Sun, 07 Oct 2012 14:51:58 -0700
Joe Perches escreveu:
> On Sun, 2012-10-07 at 23:43 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > On Sun, 7 Oct 2012, Joe Perches wrote:
> > >> Are READ and WRITE the action names? They are really the important
> > >> information in this case.
> > >
> > > Yes, most (all?) use
On 08/10/12 03:44, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Oct 2012, walter harms wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Am 07.10.2012 17:38, schrieb Julia Lawall:
>>> From: Julia Lawall
>>>
>>> Introduce use of I2c_MSG_READ/WRITE/OP, for readability.
>>>
>>> In the second i2c_msg structure, a length expressed as an explicit
On Sun, 2012-10-07 at 23:43 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Oct 2012, Joe Perches wrote:
> >> Are READ and WRITE the action names? They are really the important
> >> information in this case.
> >
> > Yes, most (all?) uses of _READ and _WRITE macros actually
> > perform some I/O.
>
> I2C_MS
On 08/10/12 08:39, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-10-07 at 20:56 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
Some people thought that it would be nice to have the macros rather than
the inlined field initializations, especially since there is no flag for
write. A separate question is whether an a
On Sun, 7 Oct 2012, Joe Perches wrote:
On Sun, 2012-10-07 at 20:56 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
Some people thought that it would be nice to have the macros rather than
the inlined field initializations, especially since there is no flag for
write. A separate question is whether an array of one
On Sun, 2012-10-07 at 20:56 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >> Some people thought that it would be nice to have the macros rather than
> >> the inlined field initializations, especially since there is no flag for
> >> write. A separate question is whether an array of one element is useful,
> >> or w
Some people thought that it would be nice to have the macros rather than
the inlined field initializations, especially since there is no flag for
write. A separate question is whether an array of one element is useful,
or whether one should systematically use & on a simple variable of the
structu
On Sun, 2012-10-07 at 19:18 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Oct 2012, walter harms wrote:
> > Am 07.10.2012 18:44, schrieb Julia Lawall:
> >> On Sun, 7 Oct 2012, walter harms wrote:
> >>> Am 07.10.2012 17:38, schrieb Julia Lawall:
> Introduce use of I2c_MSG_READ/WRITE/OP, for readabilit
On Sun, 7 Oct 2012, walter harms wrote:
Am 07.10.2012 18:44, schrieb Julia Lawall:
On Sun, 7 Oct 2012, walter harms wrote:
Am 07.10.2012 17:38, schrieb Julia Lawall:
From: Julia Lawall
Introduce use of I2c_MSG_READ/WRITE/OP, for readability.
In the second i2c_msg structure, a length e
Am 07.10.2012 18:44, schrieb Julia Lawall:
> On Sun, 7 Oct 2012, walter harms wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Am 07.10.2012 17:38, schrieb Julia Lawall:
>>> From: Julia Lawall
>>>
>>> Introduce use of I2c_MSG_READ/WRITE/OP, for readability.
>>>
>>> In the second i2c_msg structure, a length expressed as an ex
On Sun, 7 Oct 2012, walter harms wrote:
Am 07.10.2012 17:38, schrieb Julia Lawall:
From: Julia Lawall
Introduce use of I2c_MSG_READ/WRITE/OP, for readability.
In the second i2c_msg structure, a length expressed as an explicit constant
is also re-expressed as the size of the buffer, reg.
A
Am 07.10.2012 17:38, schrieb Julia Lawall:
> From: Julia Lawall
>
> Introduce use of I2c_MSG_READ/WRITE/OP, for readability.
>
> In the second i2c_msg structure, a length expressed as an explicit constant
> is also re-expressed as the size of the buffer, reg.
>
> A simplified version of the s
From: Julia Lawall
Introduce use of I2c_MSG_READ/WRITE/OP, for readability.
In the second i2c_msg structure, a length expressed as an explicit constant
is also re-expressed as the size of the buffer, reg.
A simplified version of the semantic patch that makes this change is as
follows: (http://c
23 matches
Mail list logo
