> -----Original Message----- > From: Arjan van de Ven [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2010 4:07 PM > To: Yuan, Hang > Cc: Dong, Chuanxiao; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Meego-kernel] [PATCH v1 0/3]MMC:implemented Dekker algorithm to > avoid SCU and IA using host controller at the same time > > On 11/17/2010 7:16 AM, Yuan, Hang wrote: > > Hi Arjan, > > > > Yes, one old version of eMMC Dekker Algorithm patch broke N900. Later we > > fixed > the issue and verified on N900. During integration testing with SCU FW, some > new > issues happened. So the patch is delayed on community submission until no new > issue > reported > > you're not exactly giving me confidence in your code with this. > how confident are you that you got the issues this time? i'm not.
[Henry] The feature is wrapped for MFLD platform only this time. And tested on both MFLD and N900. Will send to community for more broad review. Please tell us if any more we need to do for this patch acceptance. > > We will fix Greg's comments and submit new version to community soon. > > > > But looks like eMMC community is not very active. For example, our eMMC > hardware reset patch doesn't get community response yet after the submission 3 > weeks ago. We met the same situation on eMMC Trim and enhanced area support > patches. Could you give us any guideline on this kind of situation? Shall we > continue to > wait for community's feedback? Or can we submit to MeeGo when no response in > community? > > maybe you need to introduce your patches better? > sometimes people ignore patches from people that they don't understand > because not enough introduction has been given... > > also.. you can always CC lkml on your email to make sure you get a wider > audience. [Henry] Ok. Will CC lkml too. _______________________________________________ MeeGo-kernel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-kernel
