On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 16:43:51 +0100 Hans-Peter Jansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> + /* The mspx4xx chips need a longer delay for some reason */ > + if (!(itv->hw_flags & IVTV_HW_MSP34XX)) > + itv->i2c_algo.udelay = 5; > + > > where the logic in hunk #1 was switched, resulting in a now misleading > comment over there. If you notice the ! at the above line, and remind that the original value for udelay is 10, you can understand the comment ;) > > How about something in the line of: > > /* > * We started with a bigger udelay in order to fulfill the needs of the > * mspx4xx chips: cut it down here for all other members of the family. > */ Your suggestion seems clearer to my eyes. Still the other possibilities are not from Micronas msp34xx family, but audio decoder chips from other vendors - as weel as other kind of i2c devices, like IR chips, video encoders, etc. So, IMO, a better comment would be something like: /* * We started with a bigger udelay in order to avoid troubles with some * msp34xx chips. Boards without msp34xx are known to work with the full * i2c 100 kHz speed. */ I'm C/C the patch author (Hans) for his comments about this, since he is the one who faced with the problems with msp34xx and ivtv. Cheers, Mauro -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/