On Sat, 2016-08-13 at 10:58 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Fri, 2016-08-12 at 15:18 +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > > > > I would probably prefer that option (introduce another field) > > but you should make the overall decision, it's no strong opinion > > from my side. > > > > > > > > Would it be acceptable to document that requirement? > It might make it a bit less nasty (and easier to change later on > if necessary) to use some kind of: > > bool ast_signal_is_gpio(...) > > And stick the strcmp in there.
Yep, I'll do so for v2. Cheers, Andrew
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
