From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfram Sang Subject: Re: at24 driver - a possible problem Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 13:49:05 +0100 Message-ID: <20091106124905.GA3980@pengutronix.de> References: <533f29860911050810w4d939b39x2ad11c189f13c977@mail.gmail.com> <20091105172537.GA3332@pengutronix.de> <20091106131524.76ae52b9@hyperion.delvare> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="XsQoSWH+UP9D9v3l" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20091106131524.76ae52b9-ig7AzVSIIG7kN2dkZ6Wm7A@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jean Delvare Cc: Aleksandar Ivanov , dbrownell-Rn4VEauK+AKRv+LV9MX5uipxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org, linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org --XsQoSWH+UP9D9v3l Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > This makes a lot of sense. When a write operation is in progress, the > EEPROM is busy and may not ack its address. Whether the request is > another write or a read probably doesn't make a difference, a nack is a > nack. So the same waiting loop that we have for writes, is certainly > needed for reads as well. Shouldn't be too difficult. Any volunteer? I > can review the patch when it's done. If nobody is faster ;), I will do it this weekend. --=20 Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | --XsQoSWH+UP9D9v3l Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkr0G0EACgkQD27XaX1/VRsWPgCgr43owCqfBvtuQHtCz5bY9nZg rT0An26MIi9s6NobqIAeKgDKWvky9/pp =0Jrc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --XsQoSWH+UP9D9v3l--