On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 02:04:24PM +0100, Martin Sperl wrote:

> The bigger question (based on your comments to Patch 2/3) is:

I haven't even looked at your reply ot that yet.

> Do you want to follow the devres approach (i.e: hiding
> "struct spi_res" after allocation and returning "void *"
> to the data-payload only in spi_res_alloc)?

> Or do you prefer to have "struct spi_res" as an explicit member of
> a structure (i.e. in Patch 2/3 "struct spi_res_replaced_transfers")?

I wasn't aware that was an issue?

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to