From: w.sang@pengutronix.de (Wolfram Sang)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] i2c/pxa: only define 'blue_murder'-function if DEBUG is #defined
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 16:05:48 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100418140548.GC21364@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100418134502.GA15452@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
> > I am sure this is safe because we have retries. The eeprom driver first tries
> > to write data without a delay, because EEPROMs often have buffers. Once the
> > buffers are full, the chip will not answer to the next write request which will
> > result in a timeout for this write request. This is expected, so it will be
> > retried after some delay. Something like -EBUSY. Only if another "outer"
> > timeout passed after some retries, then we have a problem and this should be
> > user visible. But the timeout for the write request is nothing exceptional and
> > the user doesn't need to be informed about it, especially not in this detail.
> > This is what the patch is addressing.
>
> And what if it's not an EEPROM that you're talking to?
That's up to the corresponding driver. The driver is still notified via the
return value how many i2c-messages could be transmitted. If this is not equal
to what the driver intended, then it can decide to retry or notify the user.
And that is the apropriate level. Doing all this printout at the bus-driver
level is only interesting for developers. Users are frightened by the "timeout"
in their logs although everything might be as expected. A bus driver can't
know.
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20100418/b4e5ff85/attachment.sig>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-18 14:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-03 19:03 [PATCH 1/2] [ARM] i2c/pxa: remove unused macro Uwe Kleine-König
2009-11-03 19:03 ` [PATCH 2/2] [ARM] i2c/pxa: only define 'blue_murder'-function if DEBUG is #defined Uwe Kleine-König
2009-11-03 19:06 ` [PATCH 1/2] [ARM] i2c/pxa: remove unused macro Pavel Machek
2009-11-03 20:00 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2009-11-03 21:01 ` Russell King
2009-11-03 22:12 ` Ben Dooks
2009-11-04 19:06 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2009-11-04 9:00 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2009-11-03 22:13 ` Ben Dooks
2009-11-09 8:18 ` [PATCH 1/2 RESENT] " Uwe Kleine-König
2009-11-09 8:18 ` [PATCH 2/2 RESENT] [ARM] i2c/pxa: only define 'blue_murder'-function if DEBUG is #defined Uwe Kleine-König
2009-11-09 8:58 ` Eric Miao
2009-11-19 19:15 ` [PATCH 1/2 RESEND#2] i2c/pxa: remove unused macro Uwe Kleine-König
2009-11-19 19:15 ` [PATCH 2/2 RESEND#2] i2c/pxa: only define 'blue_murder'-function if DEBUG is #defined Uwe Kleine-König
2010-02-24 11:00 ` my i2c-patches for 2.6.34 Uwe Kleine-König
2010-02-24 11:01 ` [PATCH 1/3] i2c/pxa: remove unused macro Uwe Kleine-König
2010-03-22 21:04 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2010-03-22 21:54 ` Roel Kluin
2010-02-24 11:01 ` [PATCH 2/3] i2c/pxa: only define 'blue_murder'-function if DEBUG is #defined Uwe Kleine-König
2010-02-28 15:55 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-03-22 21:02 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2010-04-18 13:22 ` Wolfram Sang
2010-04-18 13:45 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-04-18 14:05 ` Wolfram Sang [this message]
2010-04-18 14:11 ` Pavel Machek
2010-02-24 11:01 ` [PATCH 3/3] MAINTAINERS: add i2c tree for embedded platforms Uwe Kleine-König
2010-02-28 15:57 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2010-03-01 9:07 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2010-03-01 10:38 ` Jean Delvare
2010-03-01 11:12 ` [PATCH] " Uwe Kleine-König
2010-03-22 21:03 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2009-11-26 10:44 ` [PATCH 1/2 RESEND#2] i2c/pxa: remove unused macro Uwe Kleine-König
2009-12-08 21:18 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2009-12-08 21:44 ` Jean Delvare
2009-12-08 22:07 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2009-12-09 8:11 ` Jean Delvare
2009-12-16 13:46 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2010-01-12 10:58 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2010-01-25 9:28 ` Uwe Kleine-König
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20100418140548.GC21364@pengutronix.de \
--to=w.sang@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).