From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de (Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?=) Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2014 21:04:15 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v3] i2c: rk3x: fix bug that cause measured high_ns doesn't meet I2C spec In-Reply-To: References: <1415261514-4051-1-git-send-email-addy.ke@rock-chips.com> <1418007589-3688-1-git-send-email-addy.ke@rock-chips.com> <20141208085202.GA13486@pengutronix.de> <20141208173432.GA5732@katana> Message-ID: <20141208200415.GC13486@pengutronix.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hello, On Mon, Dec 08, 2014 at 10:53:44AM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote: > So just to summarize for Addy, I think you're being asked to spin one more time. > > 1. Update the patch description as per Uwe. Fix other typos pointed out by him. > > 2. Since you're spinning anyway, adjust "i2c" capitalization to "I2C". > > 3. If you agree with Uwe, rename spec_max_data_hold_ns to > spec_data_valid_ns. If not, we should debate in a followup patch. > > 4. If you think spec_data_hold_buffer_ns could be better represented > in another way (should this be i2c-sda-falling-time-ns"?), please do > so. If not, we should debate in a followup patch. Sounds all reasonable. I'd not address 3 and 4 in this patch, but do this in separate one. (That's what I intended from the beginning, just failed to point that out explicitly.) Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K?nig | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |