From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Heiko Schocher <hs@denx.de>
Date: Mon, 04 Nov 2013 14:21:14 +0100
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] i2c: mxs_i2c: Squash endless loop
In-Reply-To: <201311041413.12908.marex@denx.de>
References: <1383413009-4912-1-git-send-email-marex@denx.de>
	<52778D0A.5010401@denx.de> <527790A5.3010707@denx.de>
	<201311041413.12908.marex@denx.de>
Message-ID: <52779F4A.9020807@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

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.

bye,
Heiko
-- 
DENX Software Engineering GmbH,     MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany