On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 16:21:59 -0500 Ken.Fuchs wrote:
The U-Boot AT91 MCI driver is no longer the exclusive work of Atmel. So, I do not believe that a sole Atmel copyright is correct for the AT91 MCI driver.
I added MMC 4.x support to the AT91 MCI driver a while back. In response to a request for AT91 MMC 4.x support, I submitted it to the list in the form of an informal patch against u-boot-1.1.5_atmel1.2 on April 29, 2008. Without much effort, I can see that much of the code that I added is still in the various files of the AT91 MCI driver, but my company's copyright has been removed. (Please note that I never removed anyone else's copyright.)
After further investigation, I no longer believe that my MMC 4.x MCI driver code has been committed to either the u-boot-at91 or u-boot repository. I've found a reasonable explanation for all code similarities that prompted me send my first message on this topic. My apologies to all those involved in ensuring that U-Boot source code complies with the GNU GPL and to the developers of the new U-Boot Atmel MCI driver.
Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
Which driver are you talking about? I don't see any AT91 MCI driver in the u-boot tree...
u-boot-1.1.5_atmel_1.2/cpu/arm926ejs/at91sam926x/atmel_mci.c
On 2008-Apr-29 20:46 UTC, I sent to the u-boot-users mailing list an informal patch based on u-boot-1.1.5_atmel_1.2 and an old cpu/arm926ejs/at91sam926x/atmel_mci.c patch. My patch adds MMC 4.x support to the AT91SAM926x MCI driver in the u-boot-1.1.5_atmel_1.2 tree.
However, I was mistaken about my code being committed into the official u-boot tree. Please see my response above.
Sincerely,
Ken Fuchs