From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Shevchenko Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] i2c: Add Actions Semi OWL family S900 I2C driver Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 16:04:20 +0300 Message-ID: References: <20180628181042.2239-1-manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> <20180628181042.2239-6-manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> <20180630124400.GB16775@Mani-XPS-13-9360> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180630124400.GB16775@Mani-XPS-13-9360> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: Manivannan Sadhasivam Cc: devicetree , Daniel Thompson , Mani Sadhasivam , hzhang@ucrobotics.com, Wolfram Sang , Thomas Liau , Linus Walleij , 96boards@ucrobotics.com, Linux Kernel Mailing List , amit.kucheria@linaro.org, "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" , jeff.chen@actions-semi.com, Rob Herring , linux-i2c , =?UTF-8?B?5YiY54Kc?= , bdong@ucrobotics.com, =?UTF-8?Q?Andreas_F=C3=A4rber?= , linux-arm Mailing List , mp-cs@actions-semi.com List-Id: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 03:14:37PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 9:10 PM, Manivannan Sadhasivam >> wrote: >> > +static int owl_i2c_master_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adap, struct i2c_msg *msgs, >> > + int num) >> > +{ >> >> > + int ret = 0, idx; >> >> Redundant assignment. >> > > No. Actually the return path will be fixed in next iteration. Please > see my reply to Peter's review for explanation. How come? I didn't find anything related to this comment in reply you are referring to. I left deliberately the below part to show you the pointlessness of an assignment to 0. >> > + ret = owl_i2c_hw_init(i2c_dev); >> > + if (ret) >> > + return ret; Do you mean you are dropping this in next revision? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1E70C3279B for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 13:04:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D563255A8 for ; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 13:04:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="b3ktPo1o" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4D563255A8 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S937017AbeF3NE0 (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Jun 2018 09:04:26 -0400 Received: from mail-vk0-f68.google.com ([209.85.213.68]:33079 "EHLO mail-vk0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S936658AbeF3NEW (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Jun 2018 09:04:22 -0400 Received: by mail-vk0-f68.google.com with SMTP id k194-v6so6433596vke.0; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 06:04:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=uWX5JvZOL1/5xBDsmDcbNpQFrqOITpByAXSdsp0Fz1o=; b=b3ktPo1oLP6YHU/dWDoEMjPRJ8pSOiJxxFzGaaAb7TpdM+RIHy6i5/zWXXMbv8Z7Pv s/v42Haxou4hSjMhg8HNI+jQ1guzfGeLfbeQU+ueiRzXWjJsVbLeGcwF1dLD4mElDCPr qxfTjaZlQbFo6Dxg9ptki5ke8wQwBS5Cn+DC8hspi2QFd2VML4wexGRb6r14ob8+KbrE svazGcuBF/7D96+CkxORsst+3pN/tvGBoWs7hCxiRhYDgBUXdsCGIJMQC9bTGBdGLEc1 vArtD5XogKbjLqp0VgSyCIijiR63qwHzbz+IkQujud3kKRFAV1WMOdyfDP+xDRnSD49g f5kA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=uWX5JvZOL1/5xBDsmDcbNpQFrqOITpByAXSdsp0Fz1o=; b=lOc/Ps8RGK8LCLejjOSqTnoz9r6s7WiYrh0yGDJ9bhCia698/WyJ8i5bh+xT6ft2ZJ iRVxNKXQL8MymknaA4hIrAM6gV3OY/vo8rTFdwuDFv/x7g7wH/My49jYHR6TWdoB9oO7 FdcV6UgTYTa8srqSnNWTxzXPN5BCEhCyBXP7/vA2VaLPnVYpPeuJixZ3KUREl7zcPQSL Py9D/aYBfH2r0Td37hujD85F2+BVfFMGGwMRVlfvirA8EDILYw3F/mMnDflES2Vj6Ph7 Qs4bBajNPSl7Ksauogtol5HmGt8U0Z3APKLSu0EcrWiNRgaPAI/HjYk4znBLrYlq/j1i DMrg== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E2HBle6NPzz4bxgJO+bW/Yt3JQbu6bdMF4Fxqnj5eyaoa+ljvsJ KNeF399JDxLWnmxqNAzz8ROn0gD9m54kzKkfdCI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpf4FlO92D66AWl1sLkYap8HkSCslxDaiXMb7FpAgtwaXGbSEYo+C6Qp8jczb/ItfXp3QIpDOJR32hlcNYKR4FQ= X-Received: by 2002:a1f:7d09:: with SMTP id y9-v6mr5448548vkc.15.1530363861581; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 06:04:21 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 2002:a67:8b02:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Sat, 30 Jun 2018 06:04:20 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20180630124400.GB16775@Mani-XPS-13-9360> References: <20180628181042.2239-1-manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> <20180628181042.2239-6-manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> <20180630124400.GB16775@Mani-XPS-13-9360> From: Andy Shevchenko Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 16:04:20 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] i2c: Add Actions Semi OWL family S900 I2C driver To: Manivannan Sadhasivam Cc: Wolfram Sang , Rob Herring , =?UTF-8?Q?Andreas_F=C3=A4rber?= , Linus Walleij , linux-i2c , =?UTF-8?B?5YiY54Kc?= , mp-cs@actions-semi.com, 96boards@ucrobotics.com, devicetree , Daniel Thompson , amit.kucheria@linaro.org, linux-arm Mailing List , "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , hzhang@ucrobotics.com, bdong@ucrobotics.com, Mani Sadhasivam , Thomas Liau , jeff.chen@actions-semi.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 03:14:37PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 9:10 PM, Manivannan Sadhasivam >> wrote: >> > +static int owl_i2c_master_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adap, struct i2c_msg *msgs, >> > + int num) >> > +{ >> >> > + int ret = 0, idx; >> >> Redundant assignment. >> > > No. Actually the return path will be fixed in next iteration. Please > see my reply to Peter's review for explanation. How come? I didn't find anything related to this comment in reply you are referring to. I left deliberately the below part to show you the pointlessness of an assignment to 0. >> > + ret = owl_i2c_hw_init(i2c_dev); >> > + if (ret) >> > + return ret; Do you mean you are dropping this in next revision? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: andy.shevchenko@gmail.com (Andy Shevchenko) Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2018 16:04:20 +0300 Subject: [PATCH v2 5/6] i2c: Add Actions Semi OWL family S900 I2C driver In-Reply-To: <20180630124400.GB16775@Mani-XPS-13-9360> References: <20180628181042.2239-1-manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> <20180628181042.2239-6-manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org> <20180630124400.GB16775@Mani-XPS-13-9360> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > On Sat, Jun 30, 2018 at 03:14:37PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 9:10 PM, Manivannan Sadhasivam >> wrote: >> > +static int owl_i2c_master_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adap, struct i2c_msg *msgs, >> > + int num) >> > +{ >> >> > + int ret = 0, idx; >> >> Redundant assignment. >> > > No. Actually the return path will be fixed in next iteration. Please > see my reply to Peter's review for explanation. How come? I didn't find anything related to this comment in reply you are referring to. I left deliberately the below part to show you the pointlessness of an assignment to 0. >> > + ret = owl_i2c_hw_init(i2c_dev); >> > + if (ret) >> > + return ret; Do you mean you are dropping this in next revision? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko