On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 11:03:50AM +0530, Vignesh R wrote:

On 02/10/2016 01:06 AM, Mark Brown wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 09:39:58AM +0530, Vignesh R wrote:

quoted

quoted

+	if (spi_flash_read_supported(spi)) {
+		struct spi_flash_read_message msg;
+		int ret;

quoted

Looking at this I can't help but think that spi_flash_read() ought to
have the stub in rather than the caller.  But given that we're pretty
much only ever expecting one user I'm not 100% sure it actually matters.

Well, my initial patch set passed long list of arguments to
spi_flash_read(), but Brian suggested to use struct[1] in order to avoid
unnecessary churn when things need changed in the API.

I don't see what that has to do with my point?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20160212/b7807a46/attachment.sig>