On Mon, 12 Mar 2007 16:11:09 +0100 Jean Delvare <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > By the way, timeout seems to be hardcoded to 100 jiffies in the > > i2c-algo-bit driver, so there's probably not much point passing it from > > the board code when it's going to be overridden anyway. I'll add just a > > udelay parameter to the platform struct for now. > > No, it's not hardcoded. I know it looks confusing. struct i2c_adapter > has a timeout field, that's the one being set to 100 in i2c-algo-bit, > but i2c-algo-bit uses the i2c_algo_bit_data timeout field. The > i2c_adapter timeout field is unused. Ah, I see. Now that you mention it, I seem to recall I came to that conclusion last time I looked at the code, but I've apparently forgotten it since then ;) I'll add a timeout field to the platform struct as well, then. Haavard - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
