lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Apr]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/12] i2c: core: introduce atomic transfers
On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 04:15:10PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 02:40:07PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > This series adds support for very late atomic transfers to the I2C subsystem.
> > It finally reached a state which I think is ready-to-apply. This is mainly
> > because of two things:
> >
> > a) we decided to respect the current locking scheme and to not give atomic
> > transfers a priority. The code needed for that would have been either
> > incomplete or very invasive. And we cannot guarantee successful transfers
> > anyhow. See [1] for the discussion and other write-ups for design choices.
> >
> > b) thanks to a discussion with Peter Zijlstra[2], the conditions when to allow
> > atomic transfers became much clearer. The new helper i2c_in_atomic_xfer_mode()
> > adds readability, too.
> >
> > In detail, changes since RFC v2:
> >
> > * dropped coding style patch because already applied
> > * added new patch 1 to drop in_atomic() and have better conditions when
> > to enter the atomic path
> > * added support to the mux-core
> > * simplified omap conversion a little
> > * added new conversions for ocores, stu300, and algo-bit/gpio
> > * typo corrections found by Simon and Stefan
> > * added tags to drivers
> > * dropped tags from core patches because that part changed too much
> >
> > All tested on a Renesas Lager board (R-Car H2). Sadly, the i2c-sh_mobile driver
> > cannot be converted now because of other work needed first. I tested with the
> > i2c-gpio driver, though. The other driver patches are build tested. A branch
> > can be found here:
> >
> > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wsa/linux.git renesas/i2c/atomic_xfer
> >
> > I am happy for reviews and comments. Please note if you review (especially the
> > core parts), I'd like to have a short summary of your review even if there is
> > no proposed change. Like what you did, what you think about it, etc. Some stuff
> > in here is subtle, so if you went through the effort to double check my
> > assumptions you should name it :)
> >
>
> Thank you!
>
> FWIW,
>
> Reviewed-by Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
>
> for patches 1-5,12.

Thanks for the review, Andy! May I ask you once more to tag the patches
individually so patchwork can pick them up for me?

[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-04-15 14:07    [W:0.092 / U:2.688 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site