On Fri, 2020-06-26 at 10:52 +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> Hi Ezequiel,
>
> On 2020-06-25 17:35, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> > So far we've been using the .buf_finish hook to distinguish
> > decoder from encoder. This is unnecessarily obfuscated.
> >
> > Moreover, we want to move the buf_finish, so
On Fri, 2020-06-26 at 09:58 +0200, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> Hi Ezequiel,
>
> On Thu, 2020-06-25 at 13:35 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> > So far we've been using the .buf_finish hook to distinguish
> > decoder from encoder. This is unnecessarily obfuscated.
> >
> > Moreover, we want to move the
Hi Ezequiel,
On 2020-06-25 17:35, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
So far we've been using the .buf_finish hook to distinguish
decoder from encoder. This is unnecessarily obfuscated.
Moreover, we want to move the buf_finish, so use a cleaner
scheme to distinguish the driver decoder/encoder type.
Hi Ezequiel,
On Thu, 2020-06-25 at 13:35 -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote:
> So far we've been using the .buf_finish hook to distinguish
> decoder from encoder. This is unnecessarily obfuscated.
>
> Moreover, we want to move the buf_finish, so use a cleaner
> scheme to distinguish the driver
So far we've been using the .buf_finish hook to distinguish
decoder from encoder. This is unnecessarily obfuscated.
Moreover, we want to move the buf_finish, so use a cleaner
scheme to distinguish the driver decoder/encoder type.
Signed-off-by: Ezequiel Garcia
---
5 matches
Mail list logo