Re: [PATCH v3] Bluetooth: automatically flushable packets aren't allowed on LE links

[Steven Walter]

On Thu, Nov 20, 2014 at 10:51 AM, Steven Walter <stevenrwalter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > I think Marcel was after just providing a clarifying code comment in
>> > both places - having two branches of an if-statement doing exactly the
>> > same thing looks a bit weird to me. To make thins completely clear I'd
>> > suggest adding a simple helper function that you can call from both
>> > places to get the needed flags, something like the following:
>>
>> I am actually fine with just adding a comment explaining the complex if
>> statement on why it is correct. It is just a helper for everybody to
>> understand what and why it is done that way.
>
>
> Is the comment I added sufficient, or should I add one for the other if
> condition as well?  To me, the second condition is pretty straightforward:
> if the caller requested it and the hardware supports it, use NO_FLUSH.  The
> relationship between FLUSH/NO_FLUSH and low-energy is much less clear and
> more justifies a comment, in my opinion.

Did a miss a reply to this?  How would you like the next iteration of
the patch to look?
-- 
-Steven Walter <stevenrwalter@xxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/