On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 5:12 PM, Sven Van Asbroeck <thesve...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Taking above into consideration perhaps sleep is not quite good word >> at all. By functional description it sounds like latency tolerance to >> me. > > That's true, but the bit description in the chip datasheet is 'SLEEP'. > (its real function is suspend/low power, but the chip designers called > it 'SLEEP') > > Calling the bit/function something else is likely to confuse someone > who's reading the driver in combination with the chip datasheet.
Looking again into the patch I have noticed: 1) word 'sleep' is used as a part of a function name; 2) int sleep is used as binary value. Thus, I would suggest: int sleep -> bool enable (or alike). Would we agree on that? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
