Return-path: Received: from bues.ch ([80.190.117.144]:57112 "EHLO bues.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750799Ab1J0E7S (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Oct 2011 00:59:18 -0400 Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2011 06:59:11 +0200 From: Michael =?UTF-8?B?QsO8c2No?= To: Larry Finger Cc: Michael Buesch , =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= , b43-dev , wireless Subject: Re: Switching ssb to read 8-bit quantities from SPROM Message-ID: <20111027065911.43c6c49c@milhouse> (sfid-20111027_065929_789579_7018FF66) In-Reply-To: <4EA888AE.30406@lwfinger.net> References: <4EA888AE.30406@lwfinger.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 17:24:46 -0500 Larry Finger wrote: > I tested the effects of changing ssb to read the SSPROM in 8-bit hunks rather > than as 16-bit words in the manner that was just submitted for brcmsmac. > Although this simplifies the calculation of the crc8, it only reduced the size > of the module by 31 bytes, thus I will not be submitting the patch. > > When the library version of the crc8 routine was used rather than the one built > into ssb, the size of the driver was increased by 17 bytes. Well, if this doesn't cause regressions due to the changed reads, I'm OK with it (as in I don't really care either way). But it has to be tested on b44, too. -- Greetings, Michael.