From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757336AbZBSAaQ (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2009 19:30:16 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752219AbZBSA37 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2009 19:29:59 -0500 Received: from smtp126.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com ([69.147.65.185]:46502 "HELO smtp126.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751678AbZBSA37 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Feb 2009 19:29:59 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=pacbell.net; h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:From:To:Subject:Date:User-Agent:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition:Message-Id; b=tUFd0/biIwP5Ah5/rv6DBrPMAOOFxz8FURjC7WGWmqAlkKcH9nlw62tzFDqzOiXFXJNaa2ypIjrGNTBh3NmNLPkGcugetZMhkfA3LaF18nyratk2x/Uab+RlJ7aNKPktCjhWu/Ogh8EURBrphkoCUD/lodv0CSlTINAePzpnvMA= ; X-YMail-OSG: BMspLWIVM1km9B.aC3aF4t38F2sQNg2c0_9mSGKgB8CWWv8JZDHr6KSZ2qTPUekYqOYbD2jH5_PDPm78o7Fb2nTUx7ElhBIWeqRRoFYdO7k_hT7aZzb73jIuGKw7p3k0Gr3pH5UKJRGzxzvZrevend8fOxzV7e1SBYXF7Zsi0ie9IfEJRbJ7dykAW5sG X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 From: David Brownell To: Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi-gpio: Sanitize MISO bitvalue Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 16:29:56 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 Cc: Michael Buesch , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org References: <200902151630.41426.mb@bu3sch.de> <20090218130426.a12e6bfa.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20090218130426.a12e6bfa.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200902181629.57114.david-b@pacbell.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday 18 February 2009, Andrew Morton wrote: > If this function is speed-critical (which is what David's comment > implies) then perhaps this should be "fixed" by tightening up the > (presently apparently undocumented) interface?  And then speeding up > all the other getmiso() implementations? All the per-bit GPIO functions can be speed-critical, which is why they use the zero/nonzero convention instead of demanding extra instructions to switch to the zero/one convention. This particular function needs the zero/one convention; in that respect it's unusual.