Hi, On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 03:43:26PM +0530, Shubhrajyoti D wrote: > From: Felipe Balbi <ba...@ti.com> > > While they do pretty much the same thing, there > are a few peculiarities. Specially WRT erratas, > it's best to split those out and re-factor the > read/write loop to another function which both > cases call. > > This last part will be done on another patch. > > While at that, also avoid an unncessary register > read since dev->fifo_len will always contain the > correct amount of data to be transferred.
this statement isn't valid anymore, but I'd like it to be. See below
> Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi <ba...@ti.com>
> Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti D <shubhrajy...@ti.com>
> ---
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c | 126 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> 1 files changed, 94 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
> index 359ee08..45bd731 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
> @@ -820,36 +820,64 @@ complete:
> return IRQ_HANDLED;
> }
>
> - if (stat & (OMAP_I2C_STAT_RRDY | OMAP_I2C_STAT_RDR)) {
> + if (stat & OMAP_I2C_STAT_RDR) {
> u8 num_bytes = 1;
>
> + if (dev->fifo_size)
> + num_bytes = (omap_i2c_read_reg(dev,
> + OMAP_I2C_BUFSTAT_REG) >> 8)
> + & 0x3F;
I wanted to avoid reading registers if we don't have to. This value will
be sitting in dev->buf_len.
--
balbi
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
