Subject: [PATCH v3 4/5] i2c: davinci: use bus recovery infrastructure

From: [email-masked] ([email-masked])
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2015 19:28:12 +0300

On 04/06/2015 07:09 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>
>>>> Of course,  i2c_davinci_wait_bus_not_busy() has to be fixed first
>>>> as proposed by Alexander Sverdlin here:
>>>>    https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/448994/.
>>>
>>> Okay, good that you said it. So I'll give his patch series priority over
>>> this one.
>>
>>
>> Sorry, but this series already mises few merge windows and it has a lot
>> of revied-by and tested-by, so could we proceed please?
>>
>> Re-based & re-sent http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg410810.html
>
> ??? Didn't you say above that Alexaders's patch is needed first?
>

Sorry for misunderstanding.

I said that if We'd like to continue and optimize more recovery path
then yes - Alexaders's patch will be needed (patch 2 from his series
[PATCH 2/3] i2c: davinci: Refactor i2c_davinci_wait_bus_not_busy(), 
which, in turn need to be rebased as the first one in his series and 
re-send). And in my opinion all such improvements could be done by 
subsequent patches.

-- 
regards,
-grygorii