From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Seth Forshee <seth.forshee@canonical.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] apple_gmux: Add support for newer hardware
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 16:04:44 -0500
Message-ID: <20120813210444.GJ24088@thinkpad-t410>
References: <1344889232-3907-1-git-send-email-mjg@redhat.com>
 <1344889232-3907-2-git-send-email-mjg@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1344889232-3907-2-git-send-email-mjg@redhat.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Matthew Garrett <mjg@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, Bernhard Froemel <froemel@vmars.tuwien.ac.at>
List-Id: platform-driver-x86.vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Aug 13, 2012 at 04:20:32PM -0400, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> +static int gmux_index_wait_ready(struct apple_gmux_data *gmux_data)
> +{
> +	int i = 200;
> +	u8 gwr = inb(gmux_data->iostart + GMUX_PORT_WRITE);
> +
> +	while (i && (gwr & 0x01)) {
> +		inb(gmux_data->iostart + GMUX_PORT_READ);
> +		gwr = inb(gmux_data->iostart + GMUX_PORT_WRITE);
> +		msleep(100);

Wouldn't it make more sense if the msleep was before reading the port
again? Otherwise there's no substantial dely between the first and
second times we read it.

> +static int gmux_index_wait_complete(struct apple_gmux_data *gmux_data)
> +{
> +	int i = 200;
> +	u8 gwr = inb(gmux_data->iostart + GMUX_PORT_WRITE);
> +
> +	while (i && (gwr & 0x01)) {
> +		gwr = inb(gmux_data->iostart + GMUX_PORT_WRITE);
> +		msleep(100);

Likewise.