Re: [PATCH 05/64] i2c: aspeed: reword according to newest specification

Andi Shyti
2024-03-26T00:17:51Z

Hi Wolfram,

On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 02:24:58PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Match the wording of this driver wrt. the newest I2C v7, SMBus 3.2, I3C
> specifications and replace "master/slave" with more appropriate terms.
> They are also more specific because we distinguish now between a remote
> entity ("client") and a local one ("target").
>
> Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
> ---
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c | 26 +++++++++++++-------------
> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
> index ce8c4846b7fa..4e6ea4a5cab9 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-aspeed.c
> @@ -159,7 +159,7 @@ struct aspeed_i2c_bus {
> bool send_stop;
> int cmd_err;
> /* Protected only by i2c_lock_bus */
> - int master_xfer_result;
> + int xfer_result;
> /* Multi-master */
> bool multi_master;
> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_I2C_SLAVE)
> @@ -608,9 +608,9 @@ static u32 aspeed_i2c_master_irq(struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus, u32 irq_status)
> out_complete:
> bus->msgs = NULL;
> if (bus->cmd_err)
> - bus->master_xfer_result = bus->cmd_err;
> + bus->xfer_result = bus->cmd_err;
> else
> - bus->master_xfer_result = bus->msgs_index + 1;
> + bus->xfer_result = bus->msgs_index + 1;
> complete(&bus->cmd_complete);
> out_no_complete:
> return irq_handled;
> @@ -679,7 +679,7 @@ static irqreturn_t aspeed_i2c_bus_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
> return irq_remaining ? IRQ_NONE : IRQ_HANDLED;
> }
>
> -static int aspeed_i2c_master_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adap,
> +static int aspeed_i2c_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adap,
> struct i2c_msg *msgs, int num)

here the alignment goes a bi off.

> {
> struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus = i2c_get_adapdata(adap);
> @@ -738,7 +738,7 @@ static int aspeed_i2c_master_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adap,
> return -ETIMEDOUT;
> }
>
> - return bus->master_xfer_result;
> + return bus->xfer_result;
> }
>
> static u32 aspeed_i2c_functionality(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
> @@ -748,7 +748,7 @@ static u32 aspeed_i2c_functionality(struct i2c_adapter *adap)
>
> #if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_I2C_SLAVE)
> /* precondition: bus.lock has been acquired. */
> -static void __aspeed_i2c_reg_slave(struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus, u16 slave_addr)
> +static void __aspeed_i2c_reg_target(struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus, u16 slave_addr)

We have the word master/slave forgotten here and there, but as
we are here, /slave_addr/target_addr/

> {
> u32 addr_reg_val, func_ctrl_reg_val;
>
> @@ -770,7 +770,7 @@ static void __aspeed_i2c_reg_slave(struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus, u16 slave_addr)
> bus->slave_state = ASPEED_I2C_SLAVE_INACTIVE;
> }
>
> -static int aspeed_i2c_reg_slave(struct i2c_client *client)
> +static int aspeed_i2c_reg_target(struct i2c_client *client)
> {
> struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus = i2c_get_adapdata(client->adapter);
> unsigned long flags;
> @@ -781,7 +781,7 @@ static int aspeed_i2c_reg_slave(struct i2c_client *client)
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> - __aspeed_i2c_reg_slave(bus, client->addr);
> + __aspeed_i2c_reg_target(bus, client->addr);
>
> bus->slave = client;
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bus->lock, flags);
> @@ -789,7 +789,7 @@ static int aspeed_i2c_reg_slave(struct i2c_client *client)
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static int aspeed_i2c_unreg_slave(struct i2c_client *client)
> +static int aspeed_i2c_unreg_target(struct i2c_client *client)
> {
> struct aspeed_i2c_bus *bus = i2c_get_adapdata(client->adapter);
> u32 func_ctrl_reg_val;
> @@ -814,11 +814,11 @@ static int aspeed_i2c_unreg_slave(struct i2c_client *client)
> #endif /* CONFIG_I2C_SLAVE */
>
> static const struct i2c_algorithm aspeed_i2c_algo = {
> - .master_xfer = aspeed_i2c_master_xfer,
> + .xfer = aspeed_i2c_xfer,

here the alignment goes a bit off.

Andi