Hi Sricharan,

On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 11:14 +0530, Sricharan R wrote:

quoted

quoted

+       if (msg->flags & I2C_M_RD)
+               qup->rx_tag_len = (qup->blocks << 1);

here again.

hmm, why not shift ?

Because it makes reading code harder and because compiler
 is smart enough to choose appropriate instruction for
underling CPU architecture.

quoted

quoted

+       else
+               qup->rx_tag_len = 0;
+}
+
+static u32 qup_i2c_xfer_data(struct qup_i2c_dev *qup, int len,
+                                                               u8 *buf, int last)
+{

I think that xfer is too vague in this case, prefer write or send.

ok. Will change it to send.

quoted

quoted

+       static u32 val, idx;

static? please fix.

  That was intentional. Using to pack tag and data in to one word across
  two calls. So preserving val, idx across calls.

Sorry this is no go! Reorganize the code, please.

Regards,
Ivan