From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 58FC828BA95; Mon, 30 Jun 2025 14:16:51 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.10 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751293013; cv=none; b=cb6akJpnzf8l7ISxu/Uxd8piE6E6/KVolRtGGIDg2YassMH0ZWiRsoqVdGy9HDjsgVUb4CKSAMNnsxqMCVC0VBALBTKdD+q4gj4GSq2J7psyjYdgEpp74mVFBdSw4D9CZbXqX/IBTPy+na6/vxshLKhu6H/zyjaoztd4k3glRB0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1751293013; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OzPYGM4z9O73qf5/x0rNrOGtpP0MsiPbpJZyM0orLTE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=WkLAfGPOUv9/fcyjzWYA/UPlqrEY98D//LyGLh05g9KW7DP/kn3VqQhK8wDKM8Yl+qf5FTsk8lDujlvaeusiEfCNHuuQCmtflyeiS9UNZqOJtTZDjvAH8OLelmSrFUWDDOIuE45bX9p9m2knaxlvv4foY9YJBnx1sXuJh8kYRcA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=NFMFuzaO; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.10 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="NFMFuzaO" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1751293011; x=1782829011; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=OzPYGM4z9O73qf5/x0rNrOGtpP0MsiPbpJZyM0orLTE=; b=NFMFuzaOcrhWaK9s8IOKDOkIRE5uzWVcN/lo/dlEdoGkdik9SnW21Vw6 /rCJ/hgubR0LVwoivhZzvRKx5Ud8dOchPLuupx0ea4gAJesxg4GeDGzo5 lvYEQ9zxAGN27JSokyV4x2/NPzhWxe4RX3EMNjnwGgqgEoFLMCQmNdO9W xwKDrjBEnbrJ9ZIhCRVGzolCma2rertwmMN+rpOidGtmKIY0VGhuJ0afu 9W8ndSKAEpJh8ova5waKAfBlgNCG5foRO5wURAaT8IqHlMEtSit6B0IA6 THS9cryIx1F0fWn03KRoi2Zf2X0jLfp5zPe24CABWEnHmPJwCkRMBaxF2 Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: WO6ex5tEQ4eNpwidPok5wA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: w4OQGq97S0qKcqZGx4md5w== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11480"; a="70953170" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.16,277,1744095600"; d="scan'208";a="70953170" Received: from orviesa002.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.142]) by orvoesa102.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 30 Jun 2025 07:16:51 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 58+RhZqhRG+b0WD5ZFiBsw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: YYmDo1P1T2mvWYNOXes65w== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.16,277,1744095600"; d="scan'208";a="184493720" Received: from kuha.fi.intel.com ([10.237.72.152]) by orviesa002.jf.intel.com with SMTP; 30 Jun 2025 07:16:45 -0700 Received: by kuha.fi.intel.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 30 Jun 2025 17:16:44 +0300 Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 17:16:44 +0300 From: Heikki Krogerus To: Andy Shevchenko Cc: Rodrigo Vivi , Lucas De Marchi , Thomas =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hellstr=F6m?= , Jarkko Nikula , David Airlie , Simona Vetter , Mika Westerberg , Jan Dabros , Andi Shyti , Raag Jadav , "Tauro, Riana" , "Adatrao, Srinivasa" , "Michael J. Ruhl" , intel-xe@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] i2c: designware: Add quirk for Intel Xe Message-ID: References: <20250627135314.873972-1-heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com> <20250627135314.873972-2-heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 04:16:56PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 02:59:21PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 01:02:56PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 11:10:00AM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > > > On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 10:30:19AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > > On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 05:32:01PM -0400, Rodrigo Vivi wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 05:13:36PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 04:53:11PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > > ... > > > > > > > > > static int dw_i2c_plat_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > > > > > > { > > > > > > > > + u32 flags = (uintptr_t)device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - dev->flags = (uintptr_t)device_get_match_data(device); > > > > > > > > if (device_property_present(device, "wx,i2c-snps-model")) > > > > > > > > - dev->flags = MODEL_WANGXUN_SP | ACCESS_POLLING; > > > > > > > > + flags = MODEL_WANGXUN_SP | ACCESS_POLLING; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > dev->dev = device; > > > > > > > > dev->irq = irq; > > > > > > > > + dev->flags = flags; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Maybe I'm missing something, but why do we need these (above) changes? > > > > > > > > > > > > in between, it is introduced a new one: > > > > > > flags |= ACCESS_POLLING; > > > > > > > > > > > > So, the initialization moved up, before the ACCESS_POLLING, and > > > > > > it let the assignment to the last, along with the group. > > > > > > > > > > I still don't get. The cited code is complete equivalent. > > > > > > > > This was requested by Jarkko. > > > > > > Okay, but why? Sounds to me like unneeded churn. Can't we do this later when > > > required? > > > > You need to ask why from Jarkko - I did not really question him on > > this one. Unfortunately his on vacation at the moment. > > Yeah :-( > > > I can drop this, but then I'll have to drop also Jarkko's ACK. > > I can give mine if it helps. The code as far as I can see is 100% equivalent. > > > I think we already agreed that this function, and probable the entire > > file, need to be refactored a bit, so would you mind much if we just > > went ahead with this as it is? > > > > I'm asking that also because I don't have means or time to test this > > anymore before I start my vacation. > > I see, then we may ask Andi and Wolfram on this. I slightly prefer to have > no additional churn added without a good reason. OK. I'll fix this. thanks, -- heikki