On Wed, 02 Jul 2014, Doug Anderson wrote: > On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 12:23 AM, Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Fri, 27 Jun 2014, Doug Anderson wrote: > > > >> We know how many bytes the EC should be sending us (which is also the > >> number of bytes transferred) and also how many bytes the EC actually > >> wanted to send to us. When computing the checksum and copying back > >> data let's make sure we take the lesser of the two of those. We'll > >> also complain if the EC tried to send us too many bytes. The EC > >> sending us too few bytes is legit for when we send the EC an invalid > >> command. > >> > >> This is based on similar code in cros_ec_spi. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <diand...@chromium.org> > >> --- > >> drivers/mfd/cros_ec_i2c.c | 15 ++++++++++++--- > >> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > Acked-by: Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org> > > > > Is this patch orthogonal i.e. can it be applied without the other two > > patches? > > Yes. If patch 3/3 had worked out then it would have required patch #1 > for proper functioning and patch #2 (this patch) to avoid an ugly > error message in the log. ...but patch #1 and this patch both can > stand on their own and can be applied.
Very well, patch applied than. Clause: There is a chance that this patch might not be seen in -next for ~24-48hrs. If it's not there by 72hrs, feel free to poke. -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
