Attention is currently required from: Michał Żygowski, Angel Pons, Michael Niewöhner.

View Change

2 comments:

• File acpi_ec.h:

  • Patch Set #4, Line 41:

    bool ec_wait_for_ibuf(uint8_t control_port, unsigned int max_checks);
    bool ec_wait_for_obuf(uint8_t control_port, unsigned int max_checks);
    

    Done

    Still there.

• File acpi_ec.h:

  • Patch Set #1, Line 41:

    bool ec_wait_for_ibuf(uint8_t control_port);
    bool ec_wait_for_obuf(uint8_t control_port, unsigned int max_checks);
    

    The erase command required longer timeout on output buffer flag. […]

    So, I've been looking through the code of the follow ups. There is indeed
    only this one case where a non-default value is passed. That you need a
    higher timeout there is clear. But why do you need a lower one for every-
    thing else?

    The calls would look much cleaner without this parameter, or at least by
    making use of the default by passing 0. And we wouldn't have to expose
    EC_MAX_STATUS_CHECKS in any case.

To view, visit change 55714. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.