From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.12]) (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 DBD1020B02 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2024 15:09:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.12 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708700983; cv=none; b=GlzldubTMJvUC0K265U1lQ49KCTgyzPfpN3RzV1Go3gRt+zGhdnrVzNlRrd46+cmPw6d8PqRsrL6+9mCUPKKqpFFwbQRY+Z9hj4YzUrExkUrbxj5H12cWhS8xqhNcR0N94o+C2D4/VPob56rpqfvrsEMKH7WO+xDP3DH+YbZM9g= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708700983; c=relaxed/simple; bh=QhIzQs9mDbq7cwffyaHbj1EJz6YMEuMa2qoQZcCVhNk=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=UEW/rxDqlx1+Ank8+KmMhA9rpOOZabS8Z83mMAi0KGssxD7j6HPn5qnTzLP9E/kAquCqZECzZsTkopUv/QyRib2FhZWB9mTh0EXEbVLnNf46ML05KLQtm67UlhtQNcxae3YicEwDP4Ith2wvOD4mD/Uh8EeG+NSAiWMr60AQwKY= 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=BfSvxna4; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.12 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="BfSvxna4" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1708700982; x=1740236982; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=QhIzQs9mDbq7cwffyaHbj1EJz6YMEuMa2qoQZcCVhNk=; b=BfSvxna4sOtkS1GOWRqY4mdZl6fybm7eZclM/di35Y0lm9yvWMCCCCQd fBX/6zYOfSuqWZEaY/IYE5z8v+iykTkpeKheSdrm+IbkzdICZKNaHgeBm g1C8Xcec5/JxnpsV9jE3eCopurHjyv+HmchWUZpAv3r897PoBDcuHWbYf AwNZMLo487ZiV0MsHJ4V0IljI74IaHLwxIiRhQkL+t5ejWRC0vOv2FxeQ EL8YJjgc+2RZR4QpyI3sCQJFlnTXd4ATdjqd9afy0dpQv5ny+TOT0txug cJTg1bUYlZlZMWoLw7WcyYBLVgnhIH0x4zoPyzGf1Rs7qYgnUVyyC7WMm A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10993"; a="6805114" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,180,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="6805114" Received: from fmviesa001.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.141]) by fmvoesa106.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Feb 2024 07:09:41 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.06,180,1705392000"; d="scan'208";a="36945665" Received: from marquiz-s-2.fi.intel.com (HELO [10.237.72.58]) ([10.237.72.58]) by fmviesa001.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 23 Feb 2024 07:09:38 -0800 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 17:09:37 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] i2c: designware: Generic polling mode code Content-Language: en-US To: Jiawen Wu , linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org Cc: 'Andi Shyti' , 'Andy Shevchenko' , 'Mika Westerberg' , 'Jan Dabros' , 'Sanket Goswami' , 'Basavaraj Natikar' , michael.j.ruhl@intel.com References: <20240213124847.672084-1-jarkko.nikula@linux.intel.com> <003901da624b$89c7c190$9d5744b0$@trustnetic.com> From: Jarkko Nikula In-Reply-To: <003901da624b$89c7c190$9d5744b0$@trustnetic.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi On 2/18/24 11:19, Jiawen Wu wrote: > On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 8:49 PM, Jarkko Nikula wrote: >> Hi Jiawen, Sanket and Basavaraj >> >> I hope you could give a quick test to this patchset to see it won't cause >> regression on your HW. This is mostly the same than the first version what >> Jiawen tested earlier but in this 3rd version I decided to drop semphore >> touching code patches from v2 due they being out of scope and fix a few >> things noted by Andy. >> >> Changes are in the patch 3/6 with two minor fixes to comments while moving >> them and the patch 6/6 where i2c_dw_wait_transfer() is slightly modified >> by Andy's suggestion plus I decided to remove one comment which became >> unclear after this patch. > > Hi Jarkko, > > I've been testing the v3 patch series on Wangxun 10Gb NIC, it works well, too. > Thanks! > > Tested-by: Jiawen Wu > Andy: Was this set ok in your point of view now?