On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 10:38:57PM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: > "Mark A. Greer" <[email protected]> writes: > > > On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 08:55:32PM -0700, David Brownell wrote: > >> On Monday 30 March 2009, Kevin Hilman wrote: > >> > What I didn't like was the at24 stuff in the new "common" code. > >> > However, as I think about it, once I move to the new memory_accessor > >> > series (which I will push shortly) the common code only has the > >> > memory_accessor struct, not the at24_iface struct so that should be > >> > fine. > >> > > >> > IOW, once you rebase this on top of the memory_accessor series, it > >> > should be fine. For you it should mostly be > >> > s/at24_iface/memory_accessor/ > >> > >> I also disliked using a fixed offset, in particular one that > >> forced use of an EEPROM with at least 32KB storage. > >> > >> You could pass the offset as the "context" used by that setup > >> routine, and probably save an instruction while lifting those > >> needless constraints: the Ethernet address could be stored > >> anywhere, in persistent storage of any size. > > > > Thanks for the comments guys. > > > > I think I'm going to pull these 2 patches since they aren't necessary > > and resubmit them after Kevin's memory accessor stuff is in and the > > rest of the patches in this series are in. I will address your comment > > when I resubmit. > > FWIW, the memory_accessor series went into -mm today, so I pushed it > to DaVinci git. > > But, I'm OK if you want to address these later as well.
Okay, I'll take a look & decide when I get there. Hope to have a new series out later today. Mark -- _______________________________________________ Davinci-linux-open-source mailing list [email protected] http://linux.davincidsp.com/mailman/listinfo/davinci-linux-open-source
