Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1702387 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-08-02 21:20 +0200 |
| Last post | 2017-08-03 23:50 +0200 |
| Articles | 3 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH 2/2] i2c: mux: pinctrl: drop the idle_state member Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> - 2017-08-02 21:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] i2c: mux: pinctrl: drop the idle_state member Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> - 2017-08-03 01:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] i2c: mux: pinctrl: drop the idle_state member Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> - 2017-08-03 23:50 +0200
| From | Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-02 21:20 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] i2c: mux: pinctrl: drop the idle_state member |
| Message-ID | <ua7lv-5EM-11@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On 08/02/2017 01:27 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
> The information is available elsewhere.
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/muxes/i2c-mux-pinctrl.c b/drivers/i2c/muxes/i2c-mux-pinctrl.c
> static int i2c_mux_pinctrl_deselect(struct i2c_mux_core *muxc, u32 chan)
> {
> + return i2c_mux_pinctrl_select(muxc, muxc->num_adapters);
> }
> @@ -166,7 +162,7 @@ static int i2c_mux_pinctrl_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> /* Do not add any adapter for the idle state (if it's there at all). */
> - for (i = 0; i < num_names - !!mux->state_idle; i++) {
> + for (i = 0; i < num_names - !!muxc->deselect; i++) {
I think that "num_names - !!muxc->deselect" could just be
muxc->num_adapters? Otherwise,
Reviewed-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-03 01:00 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uaaMq-7QI-19@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1702387 |
On 08/02/2017 03:25 PM, Peter Rosin wrote:
> On 2017-08-02 21:06, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> On 08/02/2017 01:27 AM, Peter Rosin wrote:
>>> The information is available elsewhere.
>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/muxes/i2c-mux-pinctrl.c b/drivers/i2c/muxes/i2c-mux-pinctrl.c
>>
>>> static int i2c_mux_pinctrl_deselect(struct i2c_mux_core *muxc, u32 chan)
>>> {
>>> + return i2c_mux_pinctrl_select(muxc, muxc->num_adapters);
>>> }
>>
>>> @@ -166,7 +162,7 @@ static int i2c_mux_pinctrl_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>
>>> /* Do not add any adapter for the idle state (if it's there at all). */
>>> - for (i = 0; i < num_names - !!mux->state_idle; i++) {
>>> + for (i = 0; i < num_names - !!muxc->deselect; i++) {
>>
>> I think that "num_names - !!muxc->deselect" could just be
>> muxc->num_adapters?
>
> Not really, it's the i2c_mux_add_adapter call in the loop that bumps
> muxc->num_adapters, so the loop would not be entered. Not desirable :-)
Ok, that makes sense.
> (and muxc->max_adapters == num_names)
Well, unless muxc->deselect is true...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-08-03 23:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <uawae-5UG-33@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1702545 |
On 08/02/2017 11:19 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: > On 2017-08-03 00:50, Stephen Warren wrote: >> On 08/02/2017 03:25 PM, Peter Rosin wrote: >>> (and muxc->max_adapters == num_names) >> >> Well, unless muxc->deselect is true... > > No, deselect does not affect neither max_adapters nor num_names. They > are always equal. Ah yes, I was confusing max_adapters with num_adapters.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web