On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Vinod Koul <vinod.k...@intel.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 04:58:02PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Viresh Kumar <viresh.ku...@linaro.org> wrote:
>> > n 9 January 2013 19:20, Vinod Koul <vinod.k...@intel.com> wrote:
>> >>> +static inline bool is_slave_xfer(enum dma_transfer_direction direction)
>> >>> +{
>> >>> + return (direction == DMA_MEM_TO_DEV) || (direction ==
>> >>> DMA_DEV_TO_MEM);
>> >>> +}
>> >> After reading the subsequent patch I understand what is intent here.
>> >> Perhaps
>> >> is_slave_dirn() would have been a beter one...
>> >
>> > dirn isn't readable, it took me some time to understand the intent...
>> > Either have xfer or direction :)
>>
>> Agree with Viresh. I might rename it to is_slave_direction if you want to.
> direction sounds fine too.
Okay, I'll rename it tomorrow and send v2 for that subseries and the
other patch where changelog should be fixed.
>
> --
> ~Vinod
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
