Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 9 Jun 2023 23:25:52 +0200
From:   Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org>
To:     "wsa@kernel.org" <wsa@kernel.org>,
        Robert Hancock <robert.hancock@calian.com>,
        "michal.simek@amd.com" <michal.simek@amd.com>,
        "shubhraj@xilinx.com" <shubhraj@xilinx.com>,
        "marex@denx.de" <marex@denx.de>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org" <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: xiic: Don't try to handle more interrupt events
 after error
Message-ID: <20230609212552.5o6aopv7iicej3kn@intel.intel>
References: <20230606182558.1301413-1-robert.hancock@calian.com>
 <20230606192453.zjzz4kt76kus5hr5@intel.intel>
 <c763371c710c9952154496026610e2ff583c173a.camel@calian.com>
 <20230606212053.bwpoxyost4fkpati@intel.intel>
 <ZINGGmRLYEQ+NfkI@shikoro>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZINGGmRLYEQ+NfkI@shikoro>
Precedence: bulk

Hi Wolfram,

On Fri, Jun 09, 2023 at 05:32:42PM +0200, wsa@kernel.org wrote:
> 
> > I think the patch is correct and I will ack it:
> > 
> > Acked-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org> 
> > 
> > I think, though, that this needs a proper fix and testing, in
> > order to cover all the possible combinations. The scenario you
> > highlighted is indeed one, but not only, potential situation that
> > could arise.
> > 
> > Can I just ask you to write a bit more in the comment to 
> > highlight the possible failure?
> 
> I tend to apply it to for-current because it improves the situation.
> Further improvements could be made incrementally? D'accord everyone?
> 

OK with that!

Thanks,
Andi