On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 04:23:09PM +0200, Mehdi Djait wrote: > On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 4:06 PM Andy Shevchenko > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 03:44:29PM +0200, Mehdi Djait wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 3:39 PM Andy Shevchenko > > > <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 03:52:56PM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > > > > > On 8/24/23 14:58, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 11:16:40PM +0200, Mehdi Djait wrote: ... > > > > I see. I think my confusion can be easily cured by renaming the callback to > > > > > > > > get_amount_bytes_in_fifo() > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > > get_bytes_in_fifo() > > > > > > > > or alike. > > > > > > or leave it as is. The function is documented: > > > > > + * @get_fifo_bytes: function pointer to get number of bytes in the FIFO buffer > > > > Do you find it unambiguous? I do not. > > > > Still needs more words to explain if it's a capacity of FIFO or is it amount of > > valid bytes for the current transfer or what? > > how about change the description to: > function pointer to get amount of acceleration data bytes currently > stored in the sensor's FIFO buffer > > and change the function to "get_amount_bytes_in_fifo()" Sounds good to me, thank you! -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
