Hi Wolfram,
On 02/27/2018 02:35 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
Since you raised concern on the patch I thought of reworking this patch.
But I can see that this patch is already applied for i2c/for-next.
Kindly let me know whether I should be sending follow-up patches on top
of i2c/for-next ?
Oops,
Hi Wolfram,
On 02/27/2018 02:35 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
Since you raised concern on the patch I thought of reworking this patch.
But I can see that this patch is already applied for i2c/for-next.
Kindly let me know whether I should be sending follow-up patches on top
of i2c/for-next ?
Oops,
Hi Wolfram,
On 02/27/2018 02:34 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 10:30:31AM +0530, George Cherian wrote:
Hi Wolfram,
Thanks for the review.
On 02/27/2018 01:52 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 05:39:24AM +, George Cherian wrote:
I2C bus enters the STOP
Hi Wolfram,
On 02/27/2018 02:34 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 10:30:31AM +0530, George Cherian wrote:
Hi Wolfram,
Thanks for the review.
On 02/27/2018 01:52 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 05:39:24AM +, George Cherian wrote:
I2C bus enters the STOP
> Since you raised concern on the patch I thought of reworking this patch.
> But I can see that this patch is already applied for i2c/for-next.
> Kindly let me know whether I should be sending follow-up patches on top
> of i2c/for-next ?
Oops, that was a mistake on my side. I'll revert that
> Since you raised concern on the patch I thought of reworking this patch.
> But I can see that this patch is already applied for i2c/for-next.
> Kindly let me know whether I should be sending follow-up patches on top
> of i2c/for-next ?
Oops, that was a mistake on my side. I'll revert that
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 10:30:31AM +0530, George Cherian wrote:
> Hi Wolfram,
>
> Thanks for the review.
>
> On 02/27/2018 01:52 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 05:39:24AM +, George Cherian wrote:
> > > I2C bus enters the STOP condition after the DATA_DONE interrupt
On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 10:30:31AM +0530, George Cherian wrote:
> Hi Wolfram,
>
> Thanks for the review.
>
> On 02/27/2018 01:52 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 05:39:24AM +, George Cherian wrote:
> > > I2C bus enters the STOP condition after the DATA_DONE interrupt
Hi Wolfram,
On 02/27/2018 10:30 AM, George Cherian wrote:
Hi Wolfram,
Thanks for the review.
On 02/27/2018 01:52 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 05:39:24AM +, George Cherian wrote:
I2C bus enters the STOP condition after the DATA_DONE interrupt is
raised.
Essentially
Hi Wolfram,
On 02/27/2018 10:30 AM, George Cherian wrote:
Hi Wolfram,
Thanks for the review.
On 02/27/2018 01:52 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 05:39:24AM +, George Cherian wrote:
I2C bus enters the STOP condition after the DATA_DONE interrupt is
raised.
Essentially
Hi Wolfram,
Thanks for the review.
On 02/27/2018 01:52 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 05:39:24AM +, George Cherian wrote:
I2C bus enters the STOP condition after the DATA_DONE interrupt is raised.
Essentially the driver should be checking the bus state before sending
the
Hi Wolfram,
Thanks for the review.
On 02/27/2018 01:52 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 05:39:24AM +, George Cherian wrote:
I2C bus enters the STOP condition after the DATA_DONE interrupt is raised.
Essentially the driver should be checking the bus state before sending
the
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 05:39:24AM +, George Cherian wrote:
> I2C bus enters the STOP condition after the DATA_DONE interrupt is raised.
> Essentially the driver should be checking the bus state before sending
> the next transaction.
Yes.
> In case the next transaction is initiated while
On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 05:39:24AM +, George Cherian wrote:
> I2C bus enters the STOP condition after the DATA_DONE interrupt is raised.
> Essentially the driver should be checking the bus state before sending
> the next transaction.
Yes.
> In case the next transaction is initiated while
I2C bus enters the STOP condition after the DATA_DONE interrupt is raised.
Essentially the driver should be checking the bus state before sending
the next transaction. In case the next transaction is initiated while the
bus is busy, the prior transactions stop condition is not acheived.
Add the
I2C bus enters the STOP condition after the DATA_DONE interrupt is raised.
Essentially the driver should be checking the bus state before sending
the next transaction. In case the next transaction is initiated while the
bus is busy, the prior transactions stop condition is not acheived.
Add the
16 matches
Mail list logo
