On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 09:21:34PM +0000, Winkler, Tomas wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 02:32:32PM +0300, Tomas Winkler wrote: > > > INIT_LIST_HEAD(&resources); > > > - ret = acpi_dev_get_resources(device, &resources, > > crb_check_resource, > > > - &io_res); > > > + ret = acpi_dev_get_resources(device, &resources, > > > + crb_check_resource, &io_res); > > > > Do not randomly reflow unrelated text in patches > > It wasn't random, who breaks code like that...
.. it has nothing to do with this patch. ., and I have no idea why you think that is better, the original is what clang-format produces and it computes an optimal break point using Knuth's algorithm... > > > + /* > > > + * PTT HW bug w/a: wake up the device to access > > > + * possibly not retained registers. > > > + */ > > > + ret = __crb_cmd_ready(dev, priv); > > > + if (ret) > > > + return ret; > > > + > > > + pa_high = ioread32(&priv->cca->cmd_pa_high); > > > + pa_low = ioread32(&priv->cca->cmd_pa_low); > > > + cmd_pa = ((u64)pa_high << 32) | pa_low; > > > > Why change from the original hunk? > > This is where the bug is visible... I'll put the debug print back it might be > useful. I don't get it, what is the difference? read ordering? > > - cmd_pa = ((u64) ioread32(&priv->cca->cmd_pa_high) << 32) | > > - (u64) ioread32(&priv->cca->cmd_pa_low); Jason ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ tpmdd-devel mailing list tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tpmdd-devel
