On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 09:30:30AM +0900, Mark Brown wrote: > On Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 06:06:03PM +0100, Lars-Peter Clausen wrote: > > > Hm, this is a bit confusing. For other functions in ASoC when we > > have a pair of functions with the _locked suffix and without the one > > with _locked takes the lock, the other one doesn't. E.g. > > snd_soc_update_bits_locked. Here we do it the other way around. > > Yes, this is definitely confusing. The existing naming might not be the > best but making things inconsistent isn't going to help the situation > either.
Oops... sorry that was not intentional I will respin to correct this. Thanks, Charles > _______________________________________________ > Alsa-devel mailing list > alsa-de...@alsa-project.org > http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
