Hi Miguel,
On Thursday, August 30, 2018 1:10:59 PM CEST Miguel Ojeda wrote:
> Hi Janusz,
>
> On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:48 PM, Janusz Krzysztofik
> wrote:
> > ...
> > /* High nibble + RS, RW */
> > - for (i = 4; i < 8; i++)
> > - values[PIN_DATA0 + i] = !!(val &
On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:48 PM Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
So it's no secret that I strongly fancy this patch set.
What would be great at this point is to have some people test
that the drivers still work as expected, even better if they can do
some benchmarking.
> -
From: Miguel Ojeda
> Sent: 30 August 2018 12:11
...
> > + unsigned long value_bitmap[1]; /* for DATA[0-7], RS, RW */
>
> (I read your comments in the other email)
>
> I still find this odd, but if everyone is going to have this change
> done like this, consistency is better.
Maybe there
Hi Janusz,
On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:48 PM, Janusz Krzysztofik
wrote:
> Most users of get/set array functions iterate consecutive bits of data,
> usually a single integer, while processing array of results obtained
> from, or building an array of values to be passed to those functions.
> Save
Hi Janusz,
On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 10:48 PM Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> Most users of get/set array functions iterate consecutive bits of data,
> usually a single integer, while processing array of results obtained
> from, or building an array of values to be passed to those functions.
> Save
On 2018-08-29 22:48, Janusz Krzysztofik wrote:
> Most users of get/set array functions iterate consecutive bits of data,
> usually a single integer, while processing array of results obtained
> from, or building an array of values to be passed to those functions.
> Save time wasted on those
Most users of get/set array functions iterate consecutive bits of data,
usually a single integer, while processing array of results obtained
from, or building an array of values to be passed to those functions.
Save time wasted on those iterations by changing the functions' API to
accept bitmaps.
