On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 09:55:22 -0700
David Brownell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> As explained in the comment:  this reduces the padding.
> The previous way needed one word per bitfield; this way
> they all fit into the same word...
> 

Ah, didn't realize that. I blame the effect two weeks of vacation has on the 
brain. :)

Perhaps shuffling them all to the end (before private) so that it is more clear 
that they are grouped because of padding issues?

> 
> I'm not sure what you mean here, but then my first cup of coffee is
> still trying to do its work.  Are you saying you want me to
> 
>  - increase the padding again?
>  - define an MMC_RSP_SPI_BUSY, and use that?
> 
> The former would bother me a bit, but I could understand if you wanted
> it to be in a different patch.  The latter is no problem at all.
> 

Well, both initially. But padding is a relevant concern, so I'm content with 
the latter.

Rgds
-- 
     -- Pierre Ossman

  Linux kernel, MMC maintainer        http://www.kernel.org
  PulseAudio, core developer          http://pulseaudio.org
  rdesktop, core developer          http://www.rdesktop.org

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems?  Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >>  http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
spi-devel-general mailing list
spi-devel-general@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spi-devel-general

Reply via email to