Re: [PATCH 3/8] i2c: omap: fix error checking

Michael Trimarchi
2012-10-24T14:41:11Z

Hi

On 10/22/2012 11:46 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> It's impossible to have Arbitration Lost,
> Read Overflow, and Tranmist Underflow all
> asserted at the same time.
>
> Those error conditions are mutually exclusive
> so what the code should be doing, instead, is
> check each error flag separataly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi <balbi-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
> ---
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
> index bea0277..e0eab38 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-omap.c
> @@ -587,9 +587,9 @@ static int omap_i2c_xfer_msg(struct i2c_adapter *adap,
> goto err_i2c_init;
> }
>
> - /* We have an error */
> - if (dev->cmd_err & (OMAP_I2C_STAT_AL | OMAP_I2C_STAT_ROVR |
> - OMAP_I2C_STAT_XUDF)) {
> + if ((dev->cmd_err & OMAP_I2C_STAT_AL)
> + || (dev->cmd_err & OMAP_I2C_STAT_ROVR)
> + || (dev->cmd_err & OMAP_I2C_STAT_XUDF)) {

Sorry, what is the difference? I didn't understand the optimisation and why now
is more clear. Can you just add a comment?

Michael

> ret = -EIO;
> goto err_i2c_init;
> }
>