As this driver does not advertise protocol mangling support
(I2C_FUNC_PROTOCOL_MANGLING is not set), having code to act on
I2C_M_NOSTART is illogical, and in any case isn't supportable on
anything but the first message - which makes no sense. Remove
the I2C_M_NOSTART code.
Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+ker...@arm.linux.org.uk>
---
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c | 26 +++++---------------------
1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c
index a82ab25..d160f8c 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c
@@ -419,28 +419,12 @@ mv64xxx_i2c_execute_msg(struct mv64xxx_i2c_data
*drv_data, struct i2c_msg *msg,
spin_lock_irqsave(&drv_data->lock, flags);
mv64xxx_i2c_prepare_for_io(drv_data, msg);
- if (unlikely(msg->flags & I2C_M_NOSTART)) { /* Skip start/addr phases */
- if (drv_data->msg->flags & I2C_M_RD) {
- /* No action to do, wait for slave to send a byte */
- drv_data->action = MV64XXX_I2C_ACTION_CONTINUE;
- drv_data->state =
- MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_SLAVE_DATA;
- } else {
- drv_data->action = MV64XXX_I2C_ACTION_SEND_DATA;
- drv_data->state =
- MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_SLAVE_ACK;
- drv_data->bytes_left--;
- }
+ if (is_first) {
+ drv_data->action = MV64XXX_I2C_ACTION_SEND_START;
+ drv_data->state = MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_START_COND;
} else {
- if (is_first) {
- drv_data->action = MV64XXX_I2C_ACTION_SEND_START;
- drv_data->state =
- MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_START_COND;
- } else {
- drv_data->action = MV64XXX_I2C_ACTION_SEND_ADDR_1;
- drv_data->state =
- MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_ADDR_1_ACK;
- }
+ drv_data->action = MV64XXX_I2C_ACTION_SEND_ADDR_1;
+ drv_data->state = MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_ADDR_1_ACK;
}
drv_data->send_stop = is_last;
--
1.7.4.4
--
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
