On Fri, Jan 09, 2015 at 10:35:27PM +0300, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:

Hello.

On 01/09/2015 08:21 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:

quoted

Let the core do the checks if HW quirks prevent a transfer. Saves code
from drivers and adds consistency.

quoted

Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <redacted>
---
 drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c | 53 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c
index 39d25a8cb1ad..7b10a19abf5b 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c

@@ -2063,6 +2063,56 @@ module_exit(i2c_exit);
  * ----------------------------------------------------
  */

+/* Check if val is exceeding the quirk IFF quirk is non 0 */
+#define i2c_quirk_exceeded(val, quirk) ((quirk) && ((val) > (quirk)))
+
+static int i2c_quirk_error(struct i2c_adapter *adap, struct i2c_msg *msg, char *err_msg)
+{
+	dev_err(&adap->dev, "quirk: %s (addr 0x%04x, size %u)\n", err_msg, msg->addr, msg->len);
+	return -EOPNOTSUPP;
+}

   Always returning the same value doesn't make much sense. Are you trying
to save space on the call sites?

Please elaborate. I think it does. If a quirk matches, we report that we
don't support this transfer.

[...]

quoted

@@ -2080,6 +2130,9 @@ int __i2c_transfer(struct i2c_adapter *adap, struct i2c_msg *msgs, int num)
 	unsigned long orig_jiffies;
 	int ret, try;

+	if (adap->quirks && i2c_check_for_quirks(adap, msgs, num))

   So, you only check for non-zero result of this function? Perhaps it makes
sense to return true/false instead?

Could be done, but what would be the advantage? A lot of functions
return errno or 0.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20150109/6a035f82/attachment-0001.sig>