On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 09:03:29AM -0700, Tim Harvey wrote: > I'm not finding documentation but it looks to me like the return 1 > signifies that you have consumed that param and it shouldn't be sent to > other init functions. Like you I looked at other code and found them to > all return 1 so did the same. > > Personally the right way to disable L2X0 is to just disable the kernel > config, but that involves adding an OpenWrt kernel config to make it > optional and I was asked to try to avoid that. I feel like I'm jumping > through hoops here to get a patch committed that results in a 50% > performance boost in our boards in the case that many customers are using > it.
I personally have no objections to the patch... I was just wondering why we should return 1 and not 0 because I have simmilar code in my board. Luka _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
