From aa6bce5319a54c050af26e095287472854abccfd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Russell King Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 21:37:11 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] I2C: mv64xxx: remove I2C_M_NOSTART code As this driver does not advertise protocol mangling support (I2C_FUNC_PROTOCOL_MANGLING is not set), having code to act on I2C_M_NOSTART is illogical, and in any case isn't supportable on anything but the first message - which makes no sense. Remove the I2C_M_NOSTART code. Signed-off-by: Russell King Acked-by: Mark A. Greer Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang --- drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c | 26 +++++--------------------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c index 4b45c7363501..f11cb25c3295 100644 --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c @@ -419,28 +419,12 @@ mv64xxx_i2c_execute_msg(struct mv64xxx_i2c_data *drv_data, struct i2c_msg *msg, spin_lock_irqsave(&drv_data->lock, flags); mv64xxx_i2c_prepare_for_io(drv_data, msg); - if (unlikely(msg->flags & I2C_M_NOSTART)) { /* Skip start/addr phases */ - if (drv_data->msg->flags & I2C_M_RD) { - /* No action to do, wait for slave to send a byte */ - drv_data->action = MV64XXX_I2C_ACTION_CONTINUE; - drv_data->state = - MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_SLAVE_DATA; - } else { - drv_data->action = MV64XXX_I2C_ACTION_SEND_DATA; - drv_data->state = - MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_SLAVE_ACK; - drv_data->bytes_left--; - } + if (is_first) { + drv_data->action = MV64XXX_I2C_ACTION_SEND_START; + drv_data->state = MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_START_COND; } else { - if (is_first) { - drv_data->action = MV64XXX_I2C_ACTION_SEND_START; - drv_data->state = - MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_START_COND; - } else { - drv_data->action = MV64XXX_I2C_ACTION_SEND_ADDR_1; - drv_data->state = - MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_ADDR_1_ACK; - } + drv_data->action = MV64XXX_I2C_ACTION_SEND_ADDR_1; + drv_data->state = MV64XXX_I2C_STATE_WAITING_FOR_ADDR_1_ACK; } drv_data->send_stop = is_last; -- 2.20.1