On Wed, Dec 7, 2022 at 10:56 AM Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 01:06:46AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 2:43 AM Kent Gibson <warthog618@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > My preference would be for the driver API to be extended with a new > > > callback for the output buffer, say get_output(), and have the existing > > > get() always return the input buffer. > > > > This has a certain elegance to it, as it cuts to the bone of the > > problem and partition it in two halves, reflecting the two pieces > > of hardware: input and output buffer. Also follows Rusty Russells > > API hierarchy. > > The (one of) problem is that not all hardware may support input and output > be enabled at the same time. What would that new API return in that case > and how it would be better with get() returning the value depending on > direction? I imagine we would leave the .get_output() unassigned and the core would just rely on whatever behaviour it has now, so in *that* case, the implementation of .get() will need to be more elaborate. Yours, Linus Walleij
