On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 02:45:03PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > On Tue, 07 Jul 2015, Mark Brown wrote:
> > You just added this function in the previous patch? > You're right, it does look a little weird contained in a single > patch-set. The submission in the previous patch is the tried and > tested (i.e. in real releases) method written by ST. This patch > contains a simplification provided by me. IMO it looks and performs > better, but doesn't have the same time-under-test that the original > method does. I'm merely ensuring we keep some history in order so > provide and easy way back i.e. revert. > If I have any say at all, I'd really like to keep this piece of > history. OK, that makes sense - can you put the above in the commit message please?
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
