[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <01a30932-adae-a499-1194-57c925a3633f@acm.org>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2022 13:22:38 -0700
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: j-young.choi@...sung.com, ALIM AKHTAR <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
"avri.altman@....com" <avri.altman@....com>,
"jejb@...ux.ibm.com" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
"martin.petersen@...cle.com" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
"beanhuo@...ron.com" <beanhuo@...ron.com>,
"adrian.hunter@...el.com" <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
"linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/6] scsi: ufs: wb: Change functions name and modify
parameter name
On 7/28/22 21:54, Jinyoung CHOI wrote:
> -static inline void ufshcd_wb_config(struct ufs_hba *hba)
> +static void ufshcd_wb_set_default_flags(struct ufs_hba *hba)
It is not clear to me why the new name is considered an improvement? The
old name looks better to me. If you want to rename this function anyway,
how about ufshcd_configure_wb()?
Thanks,
Bart.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists