> -Original Message-
> From: Nath, Arindam [mailto:arindam.n...@amd.com]
> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 3:21 PM
> To: Subhash Jadavani; c...@laptop.org
> Cc: zhangfei@gmail.com; prak...@marvell.com; linux-
> m...@vger.kernel.org; Su, Henry; Lu, Aaron; anath@gmail.com
> Subject: RE
> -Original Message-
> From: Subhash Jadavani [mailto:subha...@codeaurora.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 12:15 PM
> To: Nath, Arindam; c...@laptop.org
> Cc: zhangfei@gmail.com; prak...@marvell.com; linux-
> m...@vger.kernel.org; Su, Henry; Lu, Aaron; anath@gmail.com
> Subj
> -Original Message-
> From: linux-mmc-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-mmc-
> ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Nath, Arindam
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 12:12 PM
> To: Subhash Jadavani; c...@laptop.org
> Cc: zhangfei@gmail.com; prak...@marvell.com; linux-
> m...@vger.kern
> -Original Message-
> From: Subhash Jadavani [mailto:subha...@codeaurora.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 12:04 PM
> To: Nath, Arindam; c...@laptop.org
> Cc: zhangfei@gmail.com; prak...@marvell.com; linux-
> m...@vger.kernel.org; Su, Henry; Lu, Aaron; anath@gmail.com
> Subj
> -Original Message-
> From: Subhash Jadavani [mailto:subha...@codeaurora.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 11:56 AM
> To: Nath, Arindam; c...@laptop.org
> Cc: zhangfei@gmail.com; prak...@marvell.com; linux-
> m...@vger.kernel.org; Su, Henry; Lu, Aaron; anath@gmail.com
> Subj
> -Original Message-
> From: linux-mmc-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-mmc-
> ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Nath, Arindam
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 11:53 AM
> To: Subhash Jadavani; c...@laptop.org
> Cc: zhangfei@gmail.com; prak...@marvell.com; linux-
> m...@vger.kern
> -Original Message-
> From: linux-mmc-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-mmc-
> ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Nath, Arindam
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 11:48 AM
> To: Subhash Jadavani; c...@laptop.org
> Cc: zhangfei@gmail.com; prak...@marvell.com; linux-
> m...@vger.kern
Hi Subhash,
> -Original Message-
> From: Subhash Jadavani [mailto:subha...@codeaurora.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 11:50 AM
> To: Nath, Arindam; c...@laptop.org
> Cc: zhangfei@gmail.com; prak...@marvell.com; linux-
> m...@vger.kernel.org; Su, Henry; Lu, Aaron; anath@gmai
> -Original Message-
> From: Nath, Arindam [mailto:arindam.n...@amd.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 11:45 AM
> To: Subhash Jadavani; c...@laptop.org
> Cc: zhangfei@gmail.com; prak...@marvell.com; linux-
> m...@vger.kernel.org; Su, Henry; Lu, Aaron; anath@gmail.com
> Subject
Hi Subhash,
> -Original Message-
> From: Subhash Jadavani [mailto:subha...@codeaurora.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 11:44 AM
> To: Nath, Arindam; c...@laptop.org
> Cc: zhangfei@gmail.com; prak...@marvell.com; linux-
> m...@vger.kernel.org; Su, Henry; Lu, Aaron; anath@gmai
Hi Subhash,
> -Original Message-
> From: Subhash Jadavani [mailto:subha...@codeaurora.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 11:38 AM
> To: Nath, Arindam; c...@laptop.org
> Cc: zhangfei@gmail.com; prak...@marvell.com; linux-
> m...@vger.kernel.org; Su, Henry; Lu, Aaron; anath@gmai
> -Original Message-
> From: linux-mmc-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-mmc-
> ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Nath, Arindam
> Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 11:35 AM
> To: Subhash Jadavani; c...@laptop.org
> Cc: zhangfei@gmail.com; prak...@marvell.com; linux-
> m...@vger.kern
> -Original Message-
> From: linux-mmc-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-mmc-
> ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Nath, Arindam
> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 4:37 PM
> To: Subhash Jadavani; c...@laptop.org
> Cc: zhangfei@gmail.com; prak...@marvell.com; linux-
> m...@vger.kernel.o
Hi Subhash,
> -Original Message-
> From: Subhash Jadavani [mailto:subha...@codeaurora.org]
> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 12:13 PM
> To: Nath, Arindam; c...@laptop.org
> Cc: zhangfei@gmail.com; prak...@marvell.com; linux-
> m...@vger.kernel.org; Su, Henry; Lu, Aaron; anath@gmail.c
Hi Subhash,
> -Original Message-
> From: Subhash Jadavani [mailto:subha...@codeaurora.org]
> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 3:14 PM
> To: Nath, Arindam; c...@laptop.org
> Cc: zhangfei@gmail.com; prak...@marvell.com; linux-
> m...@vger.kernel.org; Su, Henry; Lu, Aaron; anath@gmail.co
On Wed, 23 Mar 2011, Michał Mirosław wrote:
> When you grant write access to a device to some user, you should
> expect that it is all you are granting. There shouldn't be any hidden
> doors that, for example, if underlying device is SD card then you can
> destroy it by this ioctl(). Not counting w
Hi Philip
Still we can see the issue in 2.6.38(The latest kernel).
In 2.6.38, is this issue resolved ?
With Best Regards,
-
Tomoya MORINAGA
OKI SEMICONDUCTOR CO., LTD.
> -Original Message-
> From: Philip Rakity [mailto:prak...@marvell.com]
> Sent:
W dniu 22 marca 2011 23:31 użytkownik John Calixto
napisał:
> On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Michał Mirosław wrote:
>> >> It is not that unusual on "normal systems" to give write access to
>> >> some partition or device to unprivileged users. Database volumes are
>> >> one example.
>> > Are you talking abou
From: Chris Ball
Signed-off-by: Chris Ball
Cc: Jarkko Lavinen
Cc: Tony Lindgren
Cc:
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
---
drivers/mmc/host/omap.c |6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff -puN drivers/mmc/host/omap.c~drivers-mmc-host-omapc-use-resource_size
drivers/m
From: Chris Ball
Use resource_size().
Signed-off-by: Chris Ball
Cc: Madhusudhan Chikkature
Cc:
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton
---
drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c |7 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff -puN
drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c~drivers-mmc-host-omap_hsmm
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Michał Mirosław wrote:
> >> In this case, a process having access to one partition can disrupt
> >> other partitions on the same card even if it has no access to them in
> >> any other way.
> > This is true, but I can already wreak havoc on partitions for any block
> > device b
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 09:28:50PM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 02:31:31PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:38:10PM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > > Hi Chris, Ian
> > >
> > > AFAICS there are currently still a few tmio patch-series outstandin
Hi Subhash,
> -Original Message-
> From: Subhash Jadavani [mailto:subha...@codeaurora.org]
> Sent: Monday, March 21, 2011 4:29 PM
> To: Nath, Arindam; c...@laptop.org
> Cc: zhangfei@gmail.com; prak...@marvell.com; linux-
> m...@vger.kernel.org; Su, Henry; Lu, Aaron; anath@gmail.co
Allows device MMC boot partitions to be accessed. MMC partitions
are treated effectively as separate block devices on the same
MMC card.
Signed-off-by: Andrei Warkentin
---
drivers/mmc/card/Kconfig | 18
drivers/mmc/card/block.c | 212 +++-
dri
This is the 4th iteration of the MMC partitions support, which also adds
boot partition support and slight cleanup of probe/remove/issue_rq code.
I've rebased this on top of linux-next, but I haven't run tested because
linux-next doesn't have support for my platform yet. Tested on K36. Can anyone
On Tue, 22 Mar 2011, Julia Lawall wrote:
> Request_mem_region should be used with release_mem_region, not
> release_resource.
>
> A semantic patch that partially fixes this problem is as follows:
> (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
>
> //
> @b@
> expression x,E;
> @@
>
> x = request_mem_region(x->s
Request_mem_region should be used with release_mem_region, not
release_resource.
A semantic patch that partially fixes this problem is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
//
@b@
expression x,E;
@@
x = request_mem_region(x->start,...)
... when != release_mem_region(x->start,...)
when !=
Request_mem_region should be used with release_mem_region, not
release_resource.
A semantic patch that partially fixes this problem is as follows:
(http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/)
//
@b@
expression x,E;
@@
x = request_mem_region(x->start,...)
... when != release_mem_region(x->start,...)
when !=
On Tuesday 22 March 2011, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On 2011-03-22, at 2:56 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Tuesday 22 March 2011, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> >> On 2011-03-21, at 8:05 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >
> > * On cards that can only write to a single erase block at a time,
> > should I make the
Hi Chris,
> New IO FPGA implementation for Versatile Express boards contain
> MMCI (PL180) cell with FIFO extended to 128 words (512 bytes).
>
> Signed-off-by: Pawel Moll
How about this change? Matt Waddel tested it and Linus Walleij doesn't
mind it ;-)
Cheers!
Paweł
--
To unsubscribe from
On 2011-03-22, at 2:56 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 March 2011, Andreas Dilger wrote:
>> On 2011-03-21, at 8:05 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>>> So would I set the stripe_width to the erase block size, and the
>>> block group size to a multiple of that?
>>
>> When you write "block group si
On Tuesday 22 March 2011, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> On 2011-03-21, at 8:05 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Monday 21 March 2011 19:03:09 Andreas Dilger wrote:
> >> Note that mballoc was specifically designed to handle allocation
> >> requests that are aligned on RAID stripe boundaries, so it should
>
On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 02:31:31PM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 12:38:10PM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> > Hi Chris, Ian
> >
> > AFAICS there are currently still a few tmio patch-series outstanding:
> >
> > From: Guennadi Liakhovetski gmx.de>
> > Subject: [PATCH 0
> No, I don't prefer to skip this patch, and want to carry this patch,
> since these patch are used for imx53, and imx53 only support the SDHC V2.
Ooops, yes. Sorry for the noise!
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang|
Industrial Linux Solutions
Hi wolfram:
No, I don't prefer to skip this patch, and want to carry this patch,
since these patch are used for imx53, and imx53 only support the SDHC V2.
What I just want to say is that the common sd/mmc subsystem would
keep coherent with spec about the multi-block IO mode after the ACMD23 is
i
Hi Richard,
(please don't drop the list)
> I saw that some ones are discussing the implementation of the ACMD23 in the
> community.
> The new command introduced by SDHC spec3.0.
> This feature can solve the concern that mentioned by this patch.
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-mmc/msg06428.h
On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 11:55:36PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday 21 March 2011 23:38:56 Simon Horman wrote:
> > Write Speed
> > # dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/mmcblk0 bs=512 count=10
> > SD1.1: 2.5 MB/s <-- Faster than expected
> > SD2.0: 3.0 MB/s <--
37 matches
Mail list logo
