From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758702Ab0JZWzq (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Oct 2010 18:55:46 -0400 Received: from mail-bw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]:48641 "EHLO mail-bw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758096Ab0JZWzp (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Oct 2010 18:55:45 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=Qkkm5am+mNLEcaAQHB0PAx7ppYS3plWFk3Hxh2OrBXd5yenEdOKFopFk7PcUA6oRfP KewxtMUKnH8+SObT1KtmtIVLhJhwkJC8xYnOTSexLqNwQx+wuHbDtVIy69xhm5+U/F6l VcgVU2F/opzeyh0+xHoB4l30yvarPiA45kGik= Subject: Re: memstick: Alternative approach to proposed fixes From: Maxim Levitsky To: Alex Dubov Cc: LKML , Andrew Morton In-Reply-To: <1288114871-805-1-git-send-email-oakad@yahoo.com> References: <1288114871-805-1-git-send-email-oakad@yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 00:55:39 +0200 Message-ID: <1288133739.15918.3.camel@maxim-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2010-10-27 at 04:41 +1100, Alex Dubov wrote: > As I was not able to convince myself that profound changes proposed by Maxim > are really necessary, I propose to follow a much milder path with this update > round (as I outlined in my previous emails). It is really sad to see that patchset. > > In this small patchset, I fix a couple of small omissions as well as introduce > support for "extended command" MSPro transfer method (currently enabled for > JMicron, but I'll clear the TI host for this functionality soon). I expect the > current solution to scale trivially for HG and XC transfer methods (I don't > have the spec for the later yet). Indeed small. All the changes in this patchset are really minor and optional. I could have dropped them. I did much more that that. I made the memstick code readable so not only you could understand it I also wrote ms_block.c while adding common support. I made your code use that support. It is really sad that you are doing that.