[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5763AF5D.4090309@metafoo.de>
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2016 10:05:49 +0200
From: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>
To: Crestez Dan Leonard <leonard.crestez@...el.com>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
Linux I2C <linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] regmap: Add regmap_pipe_read API
On 06/17/2016 09:04 AM, Crestez Dan Leonard wrote:
> On 06/16/2016 06:43 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> Hi Leonard,
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Crestez Dan Leonard
>> <leonard.crestez@...el.com> wrote:
>>> The regmap API usually assumes that bulk read operations will read a
>>> range of registers but some I2C/SPI devices have certain registers for
>>> which a such a read operation will return data from an internal FIFO
>>> instead. Add an explicit API to support bulk read with pipe rather than
>>> range semantics.
>>
>> Please settle on either "fifo" or "pipe", instead of mixing both.
>> Personally, I prefer the former.
>
> Well, it doesn't have to be a fifo. The device can return data from some
> other kind of buffer (maybe a stack). I can adjust the documentation to
> clarify.
>
> I considered naming it something like regmap_multi_read_one_reg or
> something but regmap_pipe_read sounds reasonable and short.
stream might be another option, but pipe is ok in my opinion.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists