On Mon, 2013-11-18 at 10:42 -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 11/18/2013 02:18 AM, Shevchenko, Andriy wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-11-15 at 13:01 -0800, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 12:54 PM, Stephen Warren <[email protected]> 
> >> wrote:
> > 
> >>> Eventually, all drivers should be converted to this new API, the old API
> >>> removed, and the new API renamed to the more desirable name. 
> > 
> > I really would like to see more sensible and shorter names for the API
> > functions.
> 
> I'm not sure if you're suggesting that you:
> 
> a) Really want to API renaming I mention above to happen at some time.
> 
> b) We need to pick a better name now, for the new API this patch
> introduces. If so, do you have any better suggestion?

Sooner better, I think. 

Now only what I can propose is to change
dma_slave_request_channel_or_err() to dma_slave_request_chan().

In any way the dma_slave_request_* API is quite new and we, as far as I
understood, will come when the main request function will always return
channel or error.

-- 
Andy Shevchenko <[email protected]>
Intel Finland Oy

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to