On 15/03/2021 7:45 am, Takashi Iwai wrote:
Hi Takashi,
Thanks a lot for your comments.
On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 12:34:07 +0100,
Vitaly Rodionov wrote:
@@ -1508,7 +1508,7 @@ static void cs8409_enable_i2c_clock(struct hda_codec
*codec, unsigned int flag)
static int cs8409_i2c_wait_complete(struct hda_codec *codec)
{
int repeat = 5;
- unsigned int retval = 0;
+ unsigned int retval;
do {
retval = cs_vendor_coef_get(codec, CIR_I2C_STATUS);
@@ -1520,78 +1520,82 @@ static int cs8409_i2c_wait_complete(struct hda_codec
*codec)
} while (repeat);
- return repeat > 0 ? 0 : -1;
+ return !!repeat;
}
If the return value of the function has changed, it's nicer to
comment, e.g. a brief function description would be helpful.
Also now this looks rather like a bool?
Yes, agreed , we will add comments to describe parameters and return values
@@ -1881,13 +1896,15 @@ static void cs8409_jack_unsol_event(struct hda_codec
*codec, unsigned int res)
reg_hs_status = cs8409_i2c_read(codec, CS42L42_I2C_ADDR, 0x1124, 1);
reg_ts_status = cs8409_i2c_read(codec, CS42L42_I2C_ADDR, 0x130f, 1);
- /* Clear interrupts */
+ /* Clear interrupts, by reading interrupt status registers */
cs8409_i2c_read(codec, CS42L42_I2C_ADDR, 0x1b7b, 1);
- cs8409_i2c_read(codec, CS42L42_I2C_ADDR, 0x1308, 1);
- cs8409_i2c_read(codec, CS42L42_I2C_ADDR, 0x130f, 1);
Why those two calls are removed?
This 2 call are redundant as we already did read these 2 registers in a
code few lines above.
mutex_unlock(&spec->cs8409_i2c_mux);
+ /* If status values are < 0, read error has occurred. */
+ if ((reg_cdc_status < 0) || (reg_hs_status < 0) || (reg_ts_status < 0))
+ return;
Parentheses around the comparison are superfluous, you can remove
them.
Will fix.
thanks,
Takashi
