Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] i2c: at91: manage unexpected RXRDY flag when starting a transfer

2015-10-22 Thread Wolfram Sang
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:44:04PM +0200, Ludovic Desroches wrote: > In some cases, we could start a new i2c transfer with the RXRDY flag > set. It is not a clean state and it leads to print annoying error > messages even if there no real issue. The cause is only having garbage > data in the

Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] i2c: at91: manage unexpected RXRDY flag when starting a transfer

2015-10-22 Thread Wolfram Sang
On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 03:44:04PM +0200, Ludovic Desroches wrote: > In some cases, we could start a new i2c transfer with the RXRDY flag > set. It is not a clean state and it leads to print annoying error > messages even if there no real issue. The cause is only having garbage > data in the

[PATCH v2 2/2] i2c: at91: manage unexpected RXRDY flag when starting a transfer

2015-10-21 Thread Ludovic Desroches
In some cases, we could start a new i2c transfer with the RXRDY flag set. It is not a clean state and it leads to print annoying error messages even if there no real issue. The cause is only having garbage data in the Receive Holding Register because of a weird behavior of the RXRDY flag.

[PATCH v2 2/2] i2c: at91: manage unexpected RXRDY flag when starting a transfer

2015-10-21 Thread Ludovic Desroches
In some cases, we could start a new i2c transfer with the RXRDY flag set. It is not a clean state and it leads to print annoying error messages even if there no real issue. The cause is only having garbage data in the Receive Holding Register because of a weird behavior of the RXRDY flag.