Feel free to add a
Reviewed-by: Ronnie Sahlberg
to the patches.
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Peter Lieven wrote:
> Am 05.09.2014 um 19:05 schrieb ronnie sahlberg:
>> Looks good to me.
>>
>> (minor question is just why not let default max be 0x for both 10
>> and 16 CDBs ?)
>
> You are
Am 05.09.2014 um 19:05 schrieb ronnie sahlberg:
> Looks good to me.
>
> (minor question is just why not let default max be 0x for both 10
> and 16 CDBs ?)
You are right. I was looking at the technical limit, but in fact it doesn't
make sense to have different limits. Its ridiculous to say, you
Looks good to me.
(minor question is just why not let default max be 0x for both 10
and 16 CDBs ?)
On Fri, Sep 5, 2014 at 9:51 AM, Peter Lieven wrote:
> This series adds the basics for introducing a maximum transfer length
> to the block layer. Its main purpose is currently avoiding that
> a
