Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-64164-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2024 19:28:39 +0000
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>
Cc: Martin Sperl <kernel@martin.sperl.org>,
	David Jander <david@protonic.nl>,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
	Michael Hennerich <michael.hennerich@analog.com>,
	Nuno =?iso-8859-1?Q?S=E1?= <nuno.sa@analog.com>,
	Alain Volmat <alain.volmat@foss.st.com>,
	Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>,
	Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com>,
	linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] spi: add spi_optimize_message() APIs
Message-ID: <6900e726-dac7-45c0-a88f-7830c1c7e43f@sirena.org.uk>
References: <20240212-mainline-spi-precook-message-v1-0-a2373cd72d36@baylibre.com>
 <20240212-mainline-spi-precook-message-v1-1-a2373cd72d36@baylibre.com>
 <54623b74-872a-41dc-992f-71a586d145ec@sirena.org.uk>
 <CAMknhBGt0EyA_FcpXbmT-PStZqmZ_PUENHbVfgDFOwWcv5gTAw@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Vu/aZ+4oRClrdlxp"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAMknhBGt0EyA_FcpXbmT-PStZqmZ_PUENHbVfgDFOwWcv5gTAw@mail.gmail.com>


--Vu/aZ+4oRClrdlxp
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 01:26:02PM -0600, David Lechner wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 12:55=E2=80=AFPM Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> =
wrote:

> > It would probably be clearer to name the parameter pre_optimising rather
> > than pre_optimized, as it is the logic is a bit confusing.  Either that
> > or some comments.  A similar issue applies on the cleanup path.

> Per Jonathan's suggestion, I plan to remove the parameter from this
> function and handle this flag at the call site instead.

That works too.

--Vu/aZ+4oRClrdlxp
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAmXLwuYACgkQJNaLcl1U
h9B13Af/Sg7oS1FfB9/Qrl4jfMCRKLNMs8JEHKGOd1M5Nu8SfTT/K0LA3Vb2rrJu
SkpFl8U+gGFaJAOFpTbKbAAC8wd6iKfOxQH34JpDm+SIXmFMTYYDkt1NcSgkU5j+
h0kIbOy/GVPz7k7+t529BYiXucPTAio/6ege1DTlYhfVRtFuteRJ6xBPzqHXkycV
7Dr81PGaY0NMa2cqjGwVQo/8oCf971g3IuixqBuXQZ0LSPbJgNWjXUz+1fd+D00v
qq2DK5pcYd5FUps3k60zKGz4bch/rq7hQ9WqlMdhOSC6YYGNLMiBmfGFP5NwuhvG
dRLiDxfQR2dRKO0HuKvTFw833Fn/RA==
=1RwK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Vu/aZ+4oRClrdlxp--