Hi, On Wed, Apr 3, 2019 at 2:04 PM Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > +static int cros_ec_xfer_high_pri(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev, > > nit: the fact that a high priority workqueue is used is an > implementation detail, since the driver has no function to perform a > transfer with 'normal'/low priority there is no need to distinguish > between the two cases. In this sense I'd be inclined to remove the > 'high_pri' from the function names. > > Sorry for not mentioning this earlier, I focussed on other > details, anyway it's just a nit. I still kinda like having the "high_pri" in there since the point of this function is to transfer the work onto the high priority workqueue. It's not an exported function so having the implementation detail leak into the name isn't a bad thing, is it? ...so unless someone else thinks the name should change or you feel strongly about it I won't plan to change the name. Thanks! -Doug _______________________________________________ Linux-rockchip mailing list Linux-rockchip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-rockchip
