Re: [PATCH V2] i2c-designware: Change readl to readw and writel to writew

[Rajeev kumar <rajeev-dlh.kumar-qxv4g6HH51o@public.gmane.org>]

Hi Baruch

On 10/24/2011 4:03 PM, Baruch Siach wrote:
> Hi Rajeev,
>
> On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 03:28:02PM +0530, Rajeev Kumar wrote:
>> Since I2C designware registers are 16 bit wide and so we should use
>> readw/writew.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Rajeev Kumar<rajeev-dlh.kumar-qxv4g6HH51o@public.gmane.org>
>> ---
>>   drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware.c |  104 +++++++++++++++++-----------------
>>   1 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware.c
>> index 6eaa681..5149a10 100644
>> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware.c
>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware.c
>> @@ -216,11 +216,11 @@ struct dw_i2c_dev {
>>   	u32			abort_source;
>>   	int			irq;
>>   	struct i2c_adapter	adapter;
>> -	unsigned int		tx_fifo_depth;
>> -	unsigned int		rx_fifo_depth;
>> +	u16			tx_fifo_depth;
>> +	u16			rx_fifo_depth;
>>   };
>
> This looks wrong. The {tx,rx}_fifo_depth fields do not represent bit fields,
> but numbers. So unsigned int should be better here.

Yes, I agree with you, but I do not see any possibility of value of 
{tx,rx}_fifo_depth fields greater than 2^^16 - 1. So, would not it be 
better to keep them as u16 and save just 4 bytes.

~Rajeev

>
> baruch


>