From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfram Sang Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] i2c: davinci: Fix problems discovered on Keystone CPU Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2015 22:14:39 +0200 Message-ID: <20150403201439.GF2016@katana> References: <55003E60.3070306@nokia.com> <55008AF1.80405@linaro.org> <550145C7.20503@nokia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="l+goss899txtYvYf" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <550145C7.20503-xNZwKgViW5gAvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-i2c-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Alexander Sverdlin Cc: "ext Grygorii.Strashko-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org" , linux-i2c-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org --l+goss899txtYvYf Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 08:52:39AM +0100, Alexander Sverdlin wrote: > Hi! >=20 > On 11/03/15 19:35, ext Grygorii.Strashko-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org wrote: > >> The series address the follwing problems: > >> > "i2c: davinci: Rework racy ISR" -- stop the parallel activities in t= he driver > >> > including concurrect registers access. Also simplifies the design an= d removes > >> > some bad aids. > >> > "i2c: davinci: Refactor i2c_davinci_wait_bus_not_busy()" -- the rout= ine is > >> > over-designed and instead of "waiting" will trigger the bus recoveri= ng > >> > immediately. > >> > "i2c: davinci: Avoid sending to own address" -- works around one dav= inci > >> > controller issue when it unexpectedly switches to some sort of slave= mode > >> > trying to send to its own address. The controller remains in this lo= cked state > >> > until reset, so it's better to avoid this situation than to deal wit= h transfer > >> > timeouts. > >> >=20 > >=20 > > Have you used git format-patch --cover-letter? > > Overall stats and list of patches are missing. >=20 > Will do in v2... And please make sure the patches are chained to the cover-letter. That makes reviewing much easier. > First patch is an important fix for blocking problem and therefore a cand= idate for > -stable backports. So, it should be less dependent of the less-important = 2 and 3. IMO this patch is too intrusive for stable, so I won't add the tag. You may request that individually to stable maintainers, though, if you disagree. --l+goss899txtYvYf Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJVHvSvAAoJEBQN5MwUoCm2BtUQAIzF36vPZB+V6FlRSh4MCth/ AGWi1P4e1oG2PGtTmbugRhgN3y5S2MG+P2y1uDiW3/i91U7yxVGB4n1Wy6nL0vmX sbOXSAKDg4GOUB8rcjxuOLhIJgcwMxjO0dxggY73EFLAHtpxOniwgjs8f0soWGLY 6/Pa7mxWSXd5JZ5TiJGXIkyeXJG/qAf5iOdr6Bnb7xiZBizyihYSnW2MpiIRHXEz O9VfaPJr38W/gJmRR8YGdfZr3kdapcIBxQ7iLT6E8ryLh2uQeRV5zOVEENhNtIO0 9I2IR+UK4vpj7OhmXKI9lRLWdGaL5NL3tyZa1qi5u1N88nqSGTXmSqazn4GRTgT4 GdnEIkE2HqOMwmK8k0Cwdr3aIdBwEaAqGzqE1B119grDS3oOBhtz7Xbd1t/2VzEu TTwTsQD2MftqJOdFBwfwIBlDmMl65YD356zlP7iwAVOhG9On8XDqMHZFjgdY+wQj WuSfE8iqOjXKRlk4hlE8IEDWSEPpednmc7fuNfk4eLhUM9FqflMdhIqtwFnZ4TME oCEa+uQuArE6DDZXX5rplXZ3lW6l5eqDoY/rWZguds9/tO0mUiJ7dNEloI0kajSa 3cs6/oJm7h18K64vRwU0wlwI5hkgy82O1gpwyXVfVDvKB+tEaTXxTH0T77J+WtRR jB8itdvyy2hH2XmC1GzG =J5B1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --l+goss899txtYvYf--