On Thu, 25 Oct 2012 14:14:59 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 02:57:48PM +0200, Jean Delvare wrote:
> > Hi Felipe, Shubhrajyoti,
> >
> > On Mon, 22 Oct 2012 12:46:57 +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > > From: Shubhrajyoti D <shubhrajy...@ti.com>
> > >
> > > In case of a NACK, it's wise to tell our clients
> > > drivers about how many bytes were actually transferred.
> > >
> > > Support this by adding an extra field to the struct
> > > i2c_msg which gets incremented the amount of bytes
> > > actually transferred.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti D <shubhrajy...@ti.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi <ba...@ti.com>
> > > ---
> > > include/uapi/linux/i2c.h | 1 +
> > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/i2c.h b/include/uapi/linux/i2c.h
> > > index 0e949cb..4b35c9b 100644
> > > --- a/include/uapi/linux/i2c.h
> > > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/i2c.h
> > > @@ -77,6 +77,7 @@ struct i2c_msg {
> > > #define I2C_M_NO_RD_ACK 0x0800 /* if
> > > I2C_FUNC_PROTOCOL_MANGLING */
> > > #define I2C_M_RECV_LEN 0x0400 /* length will be first
> > > received byte */
> > > __u16 len; /* msg length */
> > > + __u16 transferred; /* actual bytes transferred */
> > > __u8 *buf; /* pointer to msg data */
> > > };
> >
> > On the principle I am fine with this, however you also need to define
> > who should initialize this field, and to what value.
>
> You also miss one very very very big point. This will break every I2C
> using userspace program out there unless it is rebuilt - this change will
> require the exact right version of those userspace programs for the
> kernel that they're being used on.
How that? The extra field is added in a hole, so we don't change the
struct size nor the relative positions of existing fields. Why would
user-space care?
--
Jean Delvare
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
