From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933212Ab2DKU27 (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Apr 2012 16:28:59 -0400 Received: from smtp.fireflyinternet.com ([109.228.6.236]:25103 "EHLO fireflyinternet.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753671Ab2DKU25 (ORCPT ); Wed, 11 Apr 2012 16:28:57 -0400 X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=forwardok (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=78.156.66.37; From: Chris Wilson Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8 v7] drm/i915/intel_i2c: use WAIT cycle, not STOP To: Daniel Kurtz , Daniel Kurtz , Keith Packard , David Airlie , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Benson Leung , Yufeng Shen In-Reply-To: References: <1333108003-6341-1-git-send-email-djkurtz@chromium.org> <1333108003-6341-5-git-send-email-djkurtz@chromium.org> <20120410103746.GH4115@phenom.ffwll.local> <20120410104147.GI4115@phenom.ffwll.local> <20120410150304.GJ4115@phenom.ffwll.local> Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 21:28:47 +0100 X-Originating-IP: 78.156.66.37 Message-ID: <1334176129_372754@CP5-2952> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 02:16:45 +0800, Daniel Kurtz wrote: > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:03 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > - Chris Wilson suggested on irc that we should wait for HW_READY even for > >  zero-length writes (and also reads), currently we don't. > > I don't think so. We just need to wait for (GMBUS_SATOER | > GMBUS_HW_WAIT_PHASE). > Why would we wait for HW_READY, too? Just paranoia when looking at the read/write sequences and wondering how safe they were with 0-length read/writes. No real reason to suspect that the code is incorrect in any way. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Wilson Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8 v7] drm/i915/intel_i2c: use WAIT cycle, not STOP Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 21:28:47 +0100 Message-ID: <1334176129_372754@CP5-2952> References: <1333108003-6341-1-git-send-email-djkurtz@chromium.org> <1333108003-6341-5-git-send-email-djkurtz@chromium.org> <20120410103746.GH4115@phenom.ffwll.local> <20120410104147.GI4115@phenom.ffwll.local> <20120410150304.GJ4115@phenom.ffwll.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1494430162==" Return-path: Received: from fireflyinternet.com (smtp.fireflyinternet.com [109.228.6.236]) by gabe.freedesktop.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B01A9F788 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 13:28:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: dri-devel-bounces+sf-dri-devel=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org Errors-To: dri-devel-bounces+sf-dri-devel=m.gmane.org@lists.freedesktop.org To: Daniel Kurtz Daniel Kurtz , Keith Packard , David Airlie , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Benson Leung , Yufeng Shen List-Id: dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org --===============1494430162== Content-Type: text/plain On Thu, 12 Apr 2012 02:16:45 +0800, Daniel Kurtz wrote: > On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 11:03 PM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > > - Chris Wilson suggested on irc that we should wait for HW_READY even for > >  zero-length writes (and also reads), currently we don't. > > I don't think so. We just need to wait for (GMBUS_SATOER | > GMBUS_HW_WAIT_PHASE). > Why would we wait for HW_READY, too? Just paranoia when looking at the read/write sequences and wondering how safe they were with 0-length read/writes. No real reason to suspect that the code is incorrect in any way. -Chris -- Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre --===============1494430162== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ dri-devel mailing list dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel --===============1494430162==--