On 25.02.2020 22:56, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
Hi Laurentiu,
On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 11:54:17 +0200 Laurentiu Tudor <laurentiu.tu...@nxp.com>
wrote:
On 21.02.2020 01:57, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 11:37:14 +1100 Stephen Rothwell <s...@canb.auug.org.au>
wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 14:01:35 -0600 Scott Wood <sw...@redhat.com> wrote:
On Thu, 2020-01-16 at 06:42 +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 07:25:45 -0600 Timur Tabi <ti...@kernel.org> wrote:
On 1/14/20 12:31 AM, Stephen Rothwell wrote:
+/**
+ * ev_byte_channel_send - send characters to a byte stream
+ * @handle: byte stream handle
+ * @count: (input) num of chars to send, (output) num chars sent
+ * @bp: pointer to chars to send
+ *
+ * Returns 0 for success, or an error code.
+ */
+static unsigned int ev_byte_channel_send(unsigned int handle,
+ unsigned int *count, const char *bp)
Well, now you've moved this into the .c file and it is no longer
available to other callers. Anything wrong with keeping it in the .h
file?
There are currently no other callers - are there likely to be in the
future? Even if there are, is it time critical enough that it needs to
be inlined everywhere?
It's not performance critical and there aren't likely to be other users --
just a matter of what's cleaner. FWIW I'd rather see the original patch,
that keeps the raw asm hcall stuff as simple wrappers in one place.
And I don't mind either way :-)
I just want to get rid of the warnings.
Any progress with this?
I think that the consensus was to pick up the original patch that is,
this one: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1220186/
I've tested it too, so please feel free to add a:
Tested-by: Laurentiu Tudor <laurentiu.tu...@nxp.com>
So, whose tree should his go via?
Maybe Scott or Michael can help us here. And while at it maybe, take a
look at this patch [1] too.
[1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1227780/
---
Best Regards, Laurentiu
