Hi,
On Thu, May 12 2011, Chris Ball wrote:
> Since the remaining objections are minor style issues, I think it makes
> sense to merge this to mmc-next now and deal with further improvements
> as patches on top of this one (which could get rebased into the original
> patch later, or not). Would an
Hi,
On Wed, May 11 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> With reference to Arnd's summation of issues with the
> previous version of the patch which can be found at
> "http://ns3.spinics.net/lists/linux-mmc/msg06693.html";
> I have made nearly all of the changes requested.
>
> I have not removed of the __pack
With reference to Arnd's summation of issues with the
previous version of the patch which can be found at
"http://ns3.spinics.net/lists/linux-mmc/msg06693.html";
I have made nearly all of the changes requested.
I have not removed of the __packed keyword from those
structures that map onto the adap
