Hi,
On Thu, May 12 2011, Chris Ball wrote:
> Since the remaining objections are minor style issues, I think it makes
> sense to merge this to mmc-next now and deal with further improvements
> as patches on top of this one (which could get rebased into the original
> patch later, or not). Would an
Hi,
On Wed, May 11 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> With reference to Arnd's summation of issues with the
> previous version of the patch which can be found at
> "http://ns3.spinics.net/lists/linux-mmc/msg06693.html";
> I have made nearly all of the changes requested.
>
> I have not removed of the __pack
With reference to Arnd's summation of issues with the
previous version of the patch which can be found at
"http://ns3.spinics.net/lists/linux-mmc/msg06693.html";
I have made nearly all of the changes requested.
I have not removed of the __packed keyword from those
structures that map onto the adap
Hi Tony,
> Add a driver for Elan Digital System's VUB300 chip
> which is a USB connected SDIO/SDmem/MMC host controller.
> A VUB300 chip enables a USB 2.0 or USB 1.1 connected host
> computer to use SDIO/SD/MMC cards without the need for
> a directly connected, for example via PCI, SDIO host
> con
On Tuesday 19 April 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> What is wrong in wanting to support non-technical users?
> Especially since there are no backward compatible issues
> involved at all.
It's good to support non-technical users. Things that are
bad about your patch are:
* Have interfaces that work only
On Tue, 2011-04-19 at 14:10 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 April 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> > The purpose of this read-only interface is for VUB300 support
> > staff to obtain information from our customers. Our customers
> > are not like the people on this list. If you have ever tried
On Tuesday 19 April 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> The purpose of this read-only interface is for VUB300 support
> staff to obtain information from our customers. Our customers
> are not like the people on this list. If you have ever tried
> to do telephone support you would appreciate the difficulty
>
On Tue, 2011-03-15 at 17:23 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 10 March 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
...
> > +static ssize_t __show_operating_mode(struct vub300_mmc_host *vub300,
> > + struct mmc_host *mmc, char *buf)
> > +{
> > + int usb_packet_size = vub3
see embedded answers:-
On Tue, 2011-03-15 at 17:23 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thursday 10 March 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> > Add a driver for Elan Digital System's VUB300 chip
> > which is a USB connected SDIO/SDmem/MMC host controller.
> > A VUB300 chip enables a USB 2.0 or USB 1.1 connect
On Thursday 10 March 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> Add a driver for Elan Digital System's VUB300 chip
> which is a USB connected SDIO/SDmem/MMC host controller.
> A VUB300 chip enables a USB 2.0 or USB 1.1 connected host
> computer to use SDIO/SD/MMC cards without the need for
> a directly connected,
On Tuesday 15 March 2011, Chris Ball wrote:
> I thought about it, but I think staging drivers generally have a much
> larger TODO list than this one would.
>
> Perhaps a good plan is: I'll push it to mmc-next after the 2.6.39 merge,
> then I'll try to work on style changes a bit (I'll send each p
Hi Wolfram,
On Tue, Mar 15 2011, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>> I'm leaning towards merging it as-is and then
>> working on incremental fixes; please yell if that sounds like a bad idea.
>
> What about staging? From my all overall impression, the driver would fit
> there.
> Also, there are more people lu
Hi,
> linux-mmc@ folks, any strong opinions on this driver? My impression is
> that it looks reasonable, but has some areas of being pretty far from
> standard CodingStyle.
I totally agree (sadly it is hard to review because of its size) and I am still
not convinced of the sysfs-entry. Then agai
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 10 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> Add a driver for Elan Digital System's VUB300 chip
> which is a USB connected SDIO/SDmem/MMC host controller.
> A VUB300 chip enables a USB 2.0 or USB 1.1 connected host
> computer to use SDIO/SD/MMC cards without the need for
> a directly connected, fo
On Tue, 25 Jan 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 10:13 +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > > The intended use of the read-only sysfs file is to enable first-line
> > > support staff to determine quickly what actual firmware file is being
> > > used.
> > You have that in the driver (and si
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 10:13 +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > The intended use of the read-only sysfs file is to enable first-line
> > support staff to determine quickly what actual firmware file is being
> > used.
> You have that in the driver (and similar ones):
> + dev_info(&vub300->udev->dev,
> The intended use of the read-only sysfs file is to enable first-line
> support staff to determine quickly what actual firmware file is being
> used.
You have that in the driver (and similar ones):
+ dev_info(&vub300->udev->dev, "requesting offload firmware %s\n",
+vub300-
On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 11:28 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > I had assumed that for a module the global initialized variables were
> > loaded at module load. That then is a problem given that new devices
> > (and drivers) are appearing quite rapidly. I therefore do not understand
> > how the global
On Mon, 24 Jan 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 10:55 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Mon, 24 Jan 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 09:43 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > > Uninitialized global scope variables are by definition assigned to the
> > > > .bs
On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 09:01 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Jan 2011, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 02:07:21PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > On Sat, 22 Jan 2011, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 04:14:46PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > > > On Fr
On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 11:09 +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 02:07:21PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Sat, 22 Jan 2011, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 04:14:46PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 21 Jan 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> > > > > Add a dr
On Sat, 2011-01-22 at 14:07 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Jan 2011, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 04:14:46PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > On Fri, 21 Jan 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> > > > Add a driver for Elan Digital System's VUB300 chip
> > > > which is a USB connec
On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 10:55 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
>
> > On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 09:43 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > Uninitialized global scope variables are by definition assigned to the
> > > .bss section. The .bss section is dynamically allocate
On Mon, 24 Jan 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 09:43 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > Uninitialized global scope variables are by definition assigned to the
> > .bss section. The .bss section is dynamically allocated at run time
> > rather than being stored in the compiled binary
> > > > Should those be static anyhow? Being USB, you could probably hook up
> > > > two of
> > > > those and want to operate one of them in this and the other one in
> > > > another
> > > > mode?
> > >
> > > You could. Whether or not you would is another question. Until then I
> > > don't t
On Mon, 2011-01-24 at 09:43 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-01-21 at 16:14 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > On Fri, 21 Jan 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> > > > There are 5 "do not initialise statics" errors reported by
> > > > scripts/checkpatch.pl
On Mon, 24 Jan 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-01-21 at 16:14 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Fri, 21 Jan 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> > > There are 5 "do not initialise statics" errors reported by
> > > scripts/checkpatch.pl
> >
> > you probably should fix those. They are due to lines s
On Fri, 2011-01-21 at 16:14 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> > There are 5 "do not initialise statics" errors reported by
> > scripts/checkpatch.pl
>
> you probably should fix those. They are due to lines such as:
>
> static int pad_input_to_usb_pkt = 0;
>
On Sun, 23 Jan 2011, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 02:07:21PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Sat, 22 Jan 2011, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 04:14:46PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 21 Jan 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Add a d
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 02:07:21PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Jan 2011, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 04:14:46PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > > On Fri, 21 Jan 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> > >
> > > > Add a driver for Elan Digital System's VUB300 chip
> > > > whic
On Sat, 22 Jan 2011, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 04:14:46PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Fri, 21 Jan 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> >
> > > Add a driver for Elan Digital System's VUB300 chip
> > > which is a USB connected SDIO/SDmem/MMC host controller.
> > > A VUB300 chip enab
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 04:14:46PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Jan 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
>
> > Add a driver for Elan Digital System's VUB300 chip
> > which is a USB connected SDIO/SDmem/MMC host controller.
> > A VUB300 chip enables a USB 2.0 or USB 1.1 connected host
> > computer t
On Fri, 21 Jan 2011, Tony Olech wrote:
> Add a driver for Elan Digital System's VUB300 chip
> which is a USB connected SDIO/SDmem/MMC host controller.
> A VUB300 chip enables a USB 2.0 or USB 1.1 connected host
> computer to use SDIO/SD/MMC cards without the need for
> a directly connected, for ex
Hi,
the answers to your questions and comments are embedded below.
Because a few changes in the patch are required and also because
the current kernel version is now 2.6.27 I am re-doing the patch
and it will be included in a second e-mail by itself.
Tony Olech
Elan Digital Systems Limited
On Thu
Hi,
the answers to your questions and comments are embedded below.
Because a few changes in the patch are required and also because
the current kernel version is now 2.6.27 I am re-doing the patch
and it will be included in a second e-mail by itself.
Tony Olech
Elan Digital Systems Limited
On Thu
Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 03:03:58PM +, Tony Olech wrote:
Any interest in reviewing this USB-SD driver? I'm especially curious
about whether you think there are worthwhile possibilities to share
code with USHC.
>>> A quick look suggests that ther
I've not given this driver a detailed review, just skimmed it and
noticed a few things.
Tony Olech wrote:
>
> +
> + Some SDIO cards will need a firmware file to be loaded and
> + sent to VUB300 chip in order to achieve better data throughput.
> + Download these "Offload Pseudoco
Hi David,
On Tue, Dec 21, 2010 at 03:03:58PM +, Tony Olech wrote:
>>> Any interest in reviewing this USB-SD driver? I'm especially curious
>>> about whether you think there are worthwhile possibilities to share
>>> code with USHC.
>> A quick look suggests that there is unlikely to be any comm
On 30/11/2010 12:23, David Vrabel wrote:
Chris Ball wrote:
Hi David,
Any interest in reviewing this USB-SD driver? I'm especially curious
about whether you think there are worthwhile possibilities to share
code with USHC.
A quick look suggests that there is unlikely to be any commonality
betw
Hi Tony,
On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 12:23:06PM +, David Vrabel wrote:
> > Any interest in reviewing this USB-SD driver? I'm especially curious
> > about whether you think there are worthwhile possibilities to share
> > code with USHC.
>
> A quick look suggests that there is unlikely to be any
Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> Any interest in reviewing this USB-SD driver? I'm especially curious
> about whether you think there are worthwhile possibilities to share
> code with USHC.
A quick look suggests that there is unlikely to be any commonality
between the two drivers.
Tony, where
41 matches
Mail list logo
