Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 9 Jan 2013 17:51:17 +0200 | Subject | Re: [resend][PATCH 03/16] dmaengine: introduce is_slave_xfer function | From | Andy Shevchenko <> |
| |
On Wed, Jan 9, 2013 at 5:10 PM, Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@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.kumar@linaro.org> wrote: >> > n 9 January 2013 19:20, Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@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
| |