From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 14:29:40 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] i2c: mxs_i2c: Squash endless loop
In-Reply-To: <52779F4A.9020807@denx.de>
References: <1383413009-4912-1-git-send-email-marex@denx.de>
	<201311041413.12908.marex@denx.de> <52779F4A.9020807@denx.de>
Message-ID: <201311041429.40188.marex@denx.de>
List-Id: <u-boot.lists.denx.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de

Dear Heiko Schocher,

> Hello Marek,
> 
> Am 04.11.2013 14:13, schrieb Marek Vasut:
> > Hi Heiko,
> > 
> >> Hello Stefano, Marek,
> >> 
> >> Am 04.11.2013 13:03, schrieb Stefano Babic:
> >>> Hi Marek,
> >>> 
> >>> On 04/11/2013 12:50, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>>> Hi Stefano,
> >>>> 
> >>>>> Hi Marek,
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> On 02/11/2013 18:23, Marek Vasut wrote:
> >>>>>> +			if (!timeout) {
> >>>>>> +				debug("MXS I2C: Failed receiving data!
> > 
> > \n");
> > 
> >>>>>> +				return -EINVAL;
> >>>>>> +			}
> >>>>>> +
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> This is a real error and not a debug information. IMHO it should be
> >>>>> better to print the error unconditionally with puts/printf, reporting
> >>>>> that the timer elapsed.
> >>>> 
> >>>> Returning -EINVAL will make the i2c stack trigger an output, so having
> >>>> it duplicated here is pointless I believe.
> >>> 
> >>> Agree on that. But then, should we not return -ETIMEDOUT (-110) ? We
> >> 
> >> Yes, that should be -ETIMEDOUT
> > 
> > Full ACK.
> > 
> >>> should print the error code in the i2c stack (do_i2c_read) instead of
> >>> checking only if the return value is not null, as we do now.
> >> 
> >> Yep, printing in do_i2c_read()  the error code would be nice. Patches
> >> are welcome :-)
> > 
> > OK, shall I also print out an error message then?
> 
> You mean in the mxs i2c driver? I think, this is not needed, as
> Stefano suggested.

OK, thanks! V2 out.

Best regards,
Marek Vasut