Hi.
On 02/17/2012 07:14 PM, hyeonsu....@samsung.com wrote:
> From: Hyeonsu Kim <hyeonsu....@samsung.com>
>
> This "if phrase" is illogical.
> and SD Spec 3.0 supports au_size from 0 to 0xF.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hyeonsu Kim <hyeonsu....@samsung.com>
> ---
> drivers/mmc/core/sd.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/sd.c b/drivers/mmc/core/sd.c
> index c63ad03..cf8bf0e 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/sd.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/sd.c
> @@ -244,7 +244,7 @@ static int mmc_read_ssr(struct mmc_card *card)
> * bitfield positions accordingly.
> */
> au = UNSTUFF_BITS(ssr, 428 - 384, 4);
> - if (au > 0 || au <= 9) {
> + if (au >= 0 && au < 16) {
I think "if (au > 0 && au <= 0xf)" is more readable and
need to check the sd-spec.
Because in SD2.0, didn't define from 0xa to 0xf.
> card->ssr.au = 1 << (au + 4);
Is it right???
card->ssr.au = 1 << (au + 4) is something wrong.
If au is 1, card->ssr.au is 32KB. BUt in spec, defined 16KB.
I think the wrong bit operation. this is more problem.
If my point is right, will send the patch.
Best Regards,
Jaehoon Chung
> es = UNSTUFF_BITS(ssr, 408 - 384, 16);
> et = UNSTUFF_BITS(ssr, 402 - 384, 6);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
