On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 04:05:56PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Simon Horman
> Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2015 13:25:04 +0900
>
> > The rocker (switch) of a rocker_port may be trivially obtained from
> > the latter it seems cleaner not to pass the former to a function when
> > the latter is being pa
From: Simon Horman
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2015 13:25:04 +0900
> The rocker (switch) of a rocker_port may be trivially obtained from
> the latter it seems cleaner not to pass the former to a function when
> the latter is being passed anyway.
>
> rocker_port_rx_proc() is omitted from this change as it
On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 01:25:04PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> The rocker (switch) of a rocker_port may be trivially obtained from
> the latter it seems cleaner not to pass the former to a function when
> the latter is being passed anyway.
Excellent idea and commonly used in many other hardware dr
The rocker (switch) of a rocker_port may be trivially obtained from
the latter it seems cleaner not to pass the former to a function when
the latter is being passed anyway.
rocker_port_rx_proc() is omitted from this change as it is a hot path case.
Signed-off-by: Simon Horman
Acked-by: Scott Fel
