On 6/16/21 8:46 PM, Richard Henderson wrote:
> On 6/16/21 9:14 AM, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote:
>> @@ -161,12 +157,11 @@ AUXReply aux_request(AUXBus *bus, AUXCommand
>> cmd, uint32_t address,
>> }
>> ret = AUX_I2C_ACK;
>> - while (len > 0) {
>> - if (i2c_send_recv(i2c_bus, data++, true) < 0) {
>> + for (i = 0; i < len; i++) {
>> + if (i2c_send(i2c_bus, data[i]) < 0) {
>> ret = AUX_I2C_NACK;
>> break;
>> }
>> - len--;
>> }
>
> This form of updating ret is better than...
>
>> @@ -200,14 +195,13 @@ AUXReply aux_request(AUXBus *bus, AUXCommand
>> cmd, uint32_t address,
>> bus->last_transaction = cmd;
>> bus->last_i2c_address = address;
>> - while (len > 0) {
>> - if (i2c_send_recv(i2c_bus, data++, true) < 0) {
>> + for (i = 0; i < len; i++) {
>> + if (i2c_send(i2c_bus, data[i]) < 0) {
>> i2c_end_transfer(i2c_bus);
>> break;
>> }
>> - len--;
>> }
>> - if (len == 0) {
>> + if (i == len) {
>> ret = AUX_I2C_ACK;
>> }
>
> ... this one.
I totally agree :) I was a bit ashamed for posting that, I thought
Zoltan would prefer less changes so used this form.
Will update on respin.
> Otherwise,
> Reviewed-by: Richard Henderson <richard.hender...@linaro.org>
Thanks!
