From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mga05.intel.com ([192.55.52.43]:5123 "EHLO mga05.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751983AbdKXQGo (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Nov 2017 11:06:44 -0500 Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2017 18:06:40 +0200 From: Ville =?iso-8859-1?Q?Syrj=E4l=E4?= To: Chris Wilson Cc: Daniel Vetter , intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 1/3] drm/i915: Pass the correct msgs to gmbus_is_index_read() Message-ID: <20171124160640.GM10981@intel.com> References: <20171123194157.25367-1-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> <151147024152.28677.8625638122230579027@mail.alporthouse.com> <20171124125528.GC10981@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20171124125528.GC10981@intel.com> Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Nov 24, 2017 at 02:55:28PM +0200, Ville Syrj�l� wrote: > On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 08:50:41PM +0000, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Ville Syrjala (2017-11-23 19:41:55) > > > From: Ville Syrj�l� > > > > > > We're supposed to examine msgs[i] and msgs[i+1] to see if they > > > form a pair suitable for an indexed transfer. But in reality > > > we're examining msgs[0] and msgs[1]. Fix this. > > > > > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org > > > Cc: Daniel Kurtz > > > Cc: Chris Wilson > > > Cc: Daniel Vetter > > > Cc: Sean Paul > > > Fixes: 56f9eac05489 ("drm/i915/intel_i2c: use INDEX cycles for i2c read transactions") > > > Signed-off-by: Ville Syrj�l� > > > --- > > > drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c > > > index eb5827110d8f..165375cbef2f 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/intel_i2c.c > > > @@ -484,7 +484,7 @@ do_gmbus_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adapter, struct i2c_msg *msgs, int num) > > > > > > for (; i < num; i += inc) { > > > inc = 1; > > > - if (gmbus_is_index_read(msgs, i, num)) { > > > + if (gmbus_is_index_read(&msgs[i], i, num)) { > > > > i is passed to gmbus_is_index_read() and used as an index into msgs. So > > this should be accounted for right? > > Doh. Yep, this patch is nonsense. The two other patches pushed to dinq. Thanks catching my mistake with this one. -- Ville Syrj�l� Intel OTC