Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751026AbWIUCvI (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Sep 2006 22:51:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751030AbWIUCvI (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Sep 2006 22:51:08 -0400 Received: from web36707.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([209.191.85.41]:26749 "HELO web36707.mail.mud.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751026AbWIUCvH (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Sep 2006 22:51:07 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=oIBgbrVy2K92yRmosKkqPXY4oqmDgFuL2h52z9jbKnYxCvb+hhtZ8GCwLk3WBEnO4q6+H005Z9Ky5mP/NGbxpyt2qbC19/zwHL44IYi4kOovGoohLg3H7Z/kSNKZZTJGaqhIGytC44F6NYhKBQFUE16xCYtBEwxyXEZhC2nrB7o= ; Message-ID: <20060921025106.61978.qmail@web36707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 19:51:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Alex Dubov Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] [MMC] Driver for TI FlashMedia card reader - source To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, drzeus-list@drzeus.cx, rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk In-Reply-To: <20060919232016.68a02e0e.akpm@osdl.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1369 Lines: 32 > Could I ask where the information which permitted this (nice-looking) driver to > be written came from? I had 3 sources for this: 1. win64 binary driver 2. linux binary driver - it says its license is GPL, but source is nowhere to be found 3. OMAP 5912 datasheet for part of the tifm_sd functionality My upcoming memorystick driver only draws from the first two sources. I should also add that I never worked for TI nor Everest Consulting (the authors of the binary driver) and don't know anybody who ever did. > The driver has lots of really big inlined functions. It's best to uninline > these. If the function has a single callsite, gcc will inline it anyway. > If the function has multiple callsites (now, or in the future), inlining it > is undesirable. I actually marked them "inline" to signify the fact that only one callsite is intended for these functions. They are not intended to be called from arbitrary places (no problem to fix those, though). __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/