Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 4 Apr 2012 18:23:48 +0200 | From | Jean Delvare <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Fix i915 drm regression on AOpen i915GMm-HFS motherboard |
| |
On Mon, 3 Jan 2011 12:26:07 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > [ related, but independent, issue ] > > On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk> wrote: > > > > That function currently requires > > GMBUS to differentiate between a NAK and an IO error (bitbanging just > > returns EREMOTEIO regardless, iirc). > > Hmm. That sounds like something that would be worth fixing regardless > and independently of this. I'd expect that a lot of users would care > whether there was an actual protocol error or whether the command got > a NAK. There's a big difference between "those lines don't seem to > even be connected to anything" and "the other end didn't like us". > > Even the comments in the bitbanging code seem to say that it should be > returning ETIMEDOUT etc for when there is no answer (and the low-level > "i2c_outb()" seems to do that), but then the code does seem to ignore > all that information and turn all errors into EREMOTEIO. > > Which sounds bogus. > > Added Jean to the cc in case he has some input (or knows who we should > bug about algo-bit.c). Also David Brownell, because he touched an > error code in that file two and a half years ago, so he now owns it > forever ;)
For the records, I did fix the bogus error codes in i2c-algo-bit in:
From abc01b2718ee1d26e83c4c62c4b79806b3240ac7 From: Jean Delvare <khali@linux-fr.org> Date: Sun, 30 Oct 2011 13:47:25 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] i2c-algo-bit: Return standard fault codes
Adjust i2c-algo-bit to return fault codes compliant with Documentation/i2c/fault-codes, rather than the undocumented and vague -EREMOTEIO.
R.I.P David...
-- Jean Delvare
| |