Hi Simon,
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 11:20:25AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote:
>Hi Peng,
>
>On 11 August 2016 at 05:00, Peng Fan <van.free...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Using {0} to initialize mmc_cmd, before filling the structure.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng....@nxp.com>
>> Cc: Jaehoon Chung <jh80.ch...@samsung.com>
>> Cc: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>
>> Cc: Bin Meng <bmeng...@gmail.com>
>> Cc: Stefan Wahren <stefan.wah...@i2se.com>
>> Cc: Clemens Gruber <clemens.gru...@pqgruber.com>
>> Cc: Kever Yang <kever.y...@rock-chips.com>
>> Cc: Eric Nelson <e...@nelint.com>
>> Cc: Stephen Warren <swar...@nvidia.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/mmc/mmc.c | 28 ++++++++++++++--------------
>> drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c | 4 ++--
>> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
>Why is this needed? Does it affect code size?
I add a timeout entry in mmc_cmd, but I do not want to specify a value for
timeout
for each mmc_cmd. So I use {0}.
Then to those who want use timeout, a value can be assigned to timeout, just
like
I added in the patchset for mmc erase.
Thanks,
Peng.
>
>Regards,
>Simon
_______________________________________________
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
