[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200805090425.GA655071@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 11:04:25 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Tomer Samara <tomersamara98@...il.com>
Cc: jerome.pouiller@...abs.com, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: wfx: refactor to avoid duplication at hif_tx.c
On Wed, Aug 05, 2020 at 11:56:08AM +0300, Tomer Samara wrote:
> Add functions wfx_full_send(), wfx_full_send_no_reply_async(),
> wfx_full_send_no_reply() and wfx_full_send_no_reply_free()
> which works as follow:
> wfx_full_send() - simple wrapper for both wfx_fill_header()
> and wfx_cmd_send().
> wfx_full_send_no_reply_async() - wrapper for both but with
> NULL as reply and size zero.
> wfx_full_send_no_reply() - same as wfx_full_send_no_reply_async()
> but with false async value
> wfx_full_send_no_reply_free() - same as wfx_full_send_no_reply()
> but also free the struct hif_msg.
Please only do one-thing-per-patch. Why shouldn't this be a 4 patch
series?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists