On 27 October 2015 at 07:24, Chaotian Jing <chaotian.j...@mediatek.com> wrote: > Change in v3: > Fix checkpatch errors and warnings for patch 8 > Split patch 9, make DT parts enabling hw reset separately > > Change in v2: > Drop the 400mhz and use assigned-clock-parents to instead > Split the original tune patch to several independent patches > Re-write the mmc_send_tuning() > Fix GPD checksum error > Move the HS400 setting to ops->prepare_hs400_tuning() > Modify SD driving settings > > Change in v1: > Add DT bindings for eMMC hardware reset > Add pinctrl of data strobe pin for HS400 mode > Modify eMMC driving settings > Add 400mhz source clock for HS400 mode > Add eMMC HS200/HS400 mode support > Add SD SDR50/SDR104 mode support > Add implement of tune function with CMD19/CMD21 > > Chaotian Jing (10): > mmc: core: Add DT bindings for eMMC hardware reset support > mmc: dt-bindings: update Mediatek MMC bindings > mmc: mediatek: make cmd_ints_mask to const > mmc: mediatek: change the argument "ddr" to "timing" > mmc: mediatek: fix got GPD checksum error interrupt when data transfer > mmc: mediatek: add implement of ops->hw_reset() > arm64: dts: mediatek: add eMMC hw reset support > mmc: mmc: extend the mmc_send_tuning() > mmc: mediatek: add HS400 support > arm64: dts: mediatek: add HS200/HS400/SDR50/SDR104 support > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/mmc.txt | 1 + > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/mtk-sd.txt | 11 +- > arch/arm64/boot/dts/mediatek/mt8173-evb.dts | 27 +- > drivers/mmc/core/host.c | 2 + > drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c | 8 +- > drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc-exynos.c | 4 +- > drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c | 2 +- > drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.h | 2 +- > drivers/mmc/host/mtk-sd.c | 304 > ++++++++++++++++++++--- > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc-imx.c | 6 +- > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c | 2 +- > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sirf.c | 2 +- > include/linux/mmc/core.h | 2 +- > 13 files changed, 322 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-) > > -- > 1.8.1.1.dirty >
Chaotian, I have applied this except the ARM patches (patch7 and patch10) as I think those should go via ARM SoC (unless I get acks for them). Regarding patch8, it didn't apply since it needed a re-base. This time it was trivial to fix, so I decided to pick it up anyway. Future wise I also advise you to significantly trim the cc/to list when posting patches. Likely what happens when that many people are requested for input, is that *none* cares. :-) Thanks and kind regards! Uffe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
