Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964869Ab2KOKS3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2012 05:18:29 -0500 Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([92.198.50.35]:44175 "EHLO metis.ext.pengutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964838Ab2KOKS2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Nov 2012 05:18:28 -0500 Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 11:18:20 +0100 From: Wolfram Sang To: Srinidhi Kasagar Cc: "chuansheng.liu@intel.com" , "linus.walleij@linaro.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Fwd: [PATCH 1/7] I2c-nomadik: Fix the usage of wait_for_completion_timeout Message-ID: <20121115101820.GC418@pengutronix.de> References: <1352222317.15558.1584.camel@cliu38-desktop-build> <20121115084858.GA29668@bnru10> <20121115092953.GA418@pengutronix.de> <20121115095741.GA6280@bnru10> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="C94crkcyjafcjHxo" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121115095741.GA6280@bnru10> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2001:6f8:1178:2:21e:67ff:fe11:9c5c X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: wsa@pengutronix.de X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on metis.ext.pengutronix.de); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-PTX-Original-Recipient: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1660 Lines: 49 --C94crkcyjafcjHxo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 03:27:42PM +0530, Srinidhi Kasagar wrote: > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 10:29:53 +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >=20 > > > > - if (timeout < 0) { > > > > - dev_err(&dev->adev->dev, > > > > - "wait_for_completion_timeout " > > > > - "returned %d waiting for event\n", timeout); > > > > - status =3D timeout; > > > > - } > > > > - > > > No, it is wrong. You need to update the status variable in the case o= f timeout. > >=20 > > Looking at the patch context, such code comes later. > But it causes regressions; without looking at the "later" code, we can't = afford merging > this code now. Later as in "a few lines later" not "some time later". Or am I missing something else? --=20 Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | --C94crkcyjafcjHxo Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlCkwWwACgkQD27XaX1/VRukewCdHgxxIEsKSngw5LopT7WAECRa CxwAn1GR0ahWKqSoV/fJeL4ncyKPFKf2 =/CFu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --C94crkcyjafcjHxo-- -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/