Messages in this thread | | | From | Andy Shevchenko <> | Date | Thu, 16 Jul 2020 13:14:13 +0300 | Subject | Re: [PATCH V1 2/2] i2c: iproc: add slave pec support |
| |
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 11:14 AM Rayagonda Kokatanur <rayagonda.kokatanur@broadcom.com> wrote: > > Iproc supports PEC computation and checking in both Master > and Slave mode. > > This patch adds support for PEC in slave mode.
...
> -#define S_RX_PEC_ERR_SHIFT 29 > +#define S_RX_PEC_ERR_SHIFT 28 > +#define S_RX_PEC_ERR_MASK 0x3 > +#define S_RX_PEC_ERR 0x1
This needs to be explained in the commit message, in particular why this change makes no regression.
...
> +static int bcm_iproc_smbus_check_slave_pec(struct bcm_iproc_i2c_dev *iproc_i2c, > + u32 val) > +{ > + u8 err_status;
> + int ret = 0;
Completely redundant variable.
> + if (!iproc_i2c->en_s_pec) > + return ret;
return 0;
> + err_status = (u8)((val >> S_RX_PEC_ERR_SHIFT) & S_RX_PEC_ERR_MASK);
Why casting?
> + if (err_status == S_RX_PEC_ERR) { > + dev_err(iproc_i2c->device, "Slave PEC error\n");
> + ret = -EBADMSG;
return ...
> + } > + > + return ret;
return 0;
> +}
...
> + if (rx_status == I2C_SLAVE_RX_END) { > + int ret; > + > + ret = bcm_iproc_smbus_check_slave_pec(iproc_i2c, > + val);
One line looks better.
> + if (!ret)
Why not positive conditional?
> + i2c_slave_event(iproc_i2c->slave, > + I2C_SLAVE_STOP, &value); > + else > + i2c_slave_event(iproc_i2c->slave, > + I2C_SLAVE_PEC_ERR, > + &value); > + }
-- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
| |