On Mon, Feb 14, 2022 at 10:20:21PM +0800, Yun Zhou wrote: > I can't see from anywhere that when cs_change is true, we must keep CS > > active. If an individual controller needs to keep CS active after the whole > > message transmission complete, I think we should set cs_change to false > > rather than true, because cs_change means to change CS, not keep CS, > > otherwise let us rename cs_change to cs_keep. *sigh* Please also look back at how this has historically been handled, this is not new behaviour. I'm not saying that this is the greatest API ever or that it'd be done this way if it were new but that doesn't mean we can just randomly change the interface and potentially disrupt users. Whatever else is going on the current behaviour is intentional.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
