On Tue, 2015-05-05 at 22:00 +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
Hi,
This looks mostly good. Could you align the wrapped function parameters
to the open parenthesis (use checkpatch --strict)?
On 28/04/2015 at 15:35:55 +0800, Eddie Huang wrote :
quoted
+static int mtk_rtc_write_trigger(struct mt6397_rtc *rtc)
+{
+ unsigned long timeout = jiffies + HZ;
+ int ret;
+ u32 data;
+
+ ret = regmap_write(rtc->regmap, rtc->addr_base + RTC_WRTGR, 1);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ return ret;
+
+ do {
+ cpu_relax();
+ ret = regmap_read(rtc->regmap, rtc->addr_base + RTC_BBPU,
+ &data);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ goto exit;
+ } while ((data & RTC_BBPU_CBUSY) && time_after(timeout, jiffies));
+
Shouldn't you return -ETIMEDOUT if the loop breaks because of time_after?
Probably yes.
I believe as written the time_after test is too much
for my little brain. I would have used time_before
and reversed the args.
I suggest moving the time_after() test into the loop,
use break; and remove the exit label too.
Maybe something like:
while (1) {
ret = regmap_read(rtc->regmap, rtc->addr_base + RTC_BBPU,
&data);
if (ret < 0)
break;
if (!(data & RTC_BBPU_CBUSY))
break;
if (time_after(jiffies, timeout)) {
ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
break;
}
cpu_relax();
}
return ret;
}