[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH v3 06/13] hw/i2c/ppc4xx_i2c: Replace i2c_send_recv() by i2c_r

From: BALATON Zoltan
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/13] hw/i2c/ppc4xx_i2c: Replace i2c_send_recv() by i2c_recv() & i2c_send()
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 22:01:21 +0200 (CEST)

On Wed, 16 Jun 2021, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
On 6/16/21 9:16 PM, Corey Minyard wrote:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 06:14:11PM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
Instead of using the confuse i2c_send_recv(), rewrite to directly
call i2c_recv() & i2c_send(), resulting in code easire to review.

Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <f4bug@amsat.org>
 hw/i2c/ppc4xx_i2c.c | 13 ++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/hw/i2c/ppc4xx_i2c.c b/hw/i2c/ppc4xx_i2c.c
index f4c5bc12d36..b3d3da56e38 100644
--- a/hw/i2c/ppc4xx_i2c.c
+++ b/hw/i2c/ppc4xx_i2c.c
@@ -240,11 +240,14 @@ static void ppc4xx_i2c_writeb(void *opaque, hwaddr addr, 
uint64_t value,
                         i2c->sts &= ~IIC_STS_ERR;
-                if (!(i2c->sts & IIC_STS_ERR) &&
-                    i2c_send_recv(i2c->bus, &i2c->mdata[i], !recv)) {
-                    i2c->sts |= IIC_STS_ERR;
-                    i2c->extsts |= IIC_EXTSTS_XFRA;
-                    break;
+                if (!(i2c->sts & IIC_STS_ERR)) {
+                    if (recv) {
+                        i2c->mdata[i] = i2c_recv(i2c->bus);
+                    } else if (i2c_send(i2c->bus, i2c->mdata[i])) {

In the previous patch you checked < 0, it would be nice to be

I did that first but thought Zoltan wouldn't be happy, then went back :)

I'll fix for the next iteration, thanks.

I generally had no problem with i2c_send_recv only that its argument that decides which operation to do was inverted compared to other similar i2c functions so my original patch just corrected that for consistency and I was happy with that. Having a send_recv in one func allowed to avoid if-else in some places like these but if you think it's better without this function at all I can work with that too. I'll have to check if these changes could break anything. At first sight I'm not sure errors are handled as before if recv fails but it was years ago I did the sm501 and ati parts and I forgot how they work so I need to check again. I'll wait for the final version of the series then and test that. I remember I had to tweak these a lot because each guest OS had drivers that did things slightly differently so if I've fixed one, another broke until I've found a way that worked for all.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]