From 016db5a85fd17147d7a6cc1c634d2add64e12084 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Roel Kluin Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 19:19:48 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] i2c: Timeouts reach -1 With a postfix decrement these timeouts reach -1 rather than 0, but after the loop it is tested whether they have become 0. As pointed out by Jean Delvare, the condition we are waiting for should also be tested before the timeout. With the current order, you could exit with a timeout error while the job is actually done. Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin Signed-off-by: Jean Delvare --- drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-amd8111.c | 4 ++-- drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-pxa.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-amd8111.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-amd8111.c index edab51973bf55..a7c59908c457c 100644 --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-amd8111.c +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-amd8111.c @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ static unsigned int amd_ec_wait_write(struct amd_smbus *smbus) { int timeout = 500; - while (timeout-- && (inb(smbus->base + AMD_EC_SC) & AMD_EC_SC_IBF)) + while ((inb(smbus->base + AMD_EC_SC) & AMD_EC_SC_IBF) && --timeout) udelay(1); if (!timeout) { @@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ static unsigned int amd_ec_wait_read(struct amd_smbus *smbus) { int timeout = 500; - while (timeout-- && (~inb(smbus->base + AMD_EC_SC) & AMD_EC_SC_OBF)) + while ((~inb(smbus->base + AMD_EC_SC) & AMD_EC_SC_OBF) && --timeout) udelay(1); if (!timeout) { diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-pxa.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-pxa.c index 6af68146c3424..bdb1f7510e915 100644 --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-pxa.c +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-pxa.c @@ -644,7 +644,7 @@ static int i2c_pxa_do_pio_xfer(struct pxa_i2c *i2c, i2c_pxa_start_message(i2c); - while (timeout-- && i2c->msg_num > 0) { + while (i2c->msg_num > 0 && --timeout) { i2c_pxa_handler(0, i2c); udelay(10); } -- 2.39.5