In the near future I'll have to start using SDIO and eMMC devices.
I wonder if I'll be able to continue to use the platform driver or if
I'll need to actually have own driver (to solve specific limits/features
due to our Hw) or if we'll extend the sdhci-pltfm d.d.
What do you think?
Hi Chris.
On 10/01/2010 01:25 AM, Chris Ball wrote:
Looks like we're waiting for a version of your STM driver with final
changes from Wolfram's review -- do you think you'll submit that soon?
Concerning the stm driver I've a doubt: currently on our platforms I can
use both the sdhci-stm and
Looks like we're waiting for a version of your STM driver with final
changes from Wolfram's review -- do you think you'll submit that soon?
If I didn't forget something, he won't need a special driver. Just a
platform_device with the standard pltfm-driver and a custom init-function and
quirks.
Hi Peppe,
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 10:41:27AM +0200, Giuseppe CAVALLARO wrote:
This patch adds the suspend and resume functions
in the sdhci-pltfm device driver.
Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Cavallaro peppe.cavall...@st.com
Thanks! I've applied this patchset (1-3) to mmc-next with minor
language
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 10:41:27AM +0200, Giuseppe CAVALLARO wrote:
This patch adds the suspend and resume functions
in the sdhci-pltfm device driver.
Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Cavallaro peppe.cavall...@st.com
Reviewed-by: Wolfram Sang w.s...@pengutronix.de
---
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:14:24AM +0200, Giuseppe CAVALLARO wrote:
Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Cavallaro peppe.cavall...@st.com
I'd prefer it the way sdhci-mv.c is doing it (just one #if-block and
returning the code from the sdhci_*-functions). Then it should be fine.
---
On 09/27/2010 12:37 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:14:24AM +0200, Giuseppe CAVALLARO wrote:
Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Cavallaro peppe.cavall...@st.com
I'd prefer it the way sdhci-mv.c is doing it (just one #if-block and
returning the code from the sdhci_*-functions). Then
On 09/27/2010 02:57 PM, Peppe CAVALLARO wrote:
On 09/27/2010 12:37 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:14:24AM +0200, Giuseppe CAVALLARO wrote:
Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Cavallaro peppe.cavall...@st.com
I'd prefer it the way sdhci-mv.c is doing it (just one #if-block and
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 03:24:02PM +0200, Peppe CAVALLARO wrote:
On 09/27/2010 02:57 PM, Peppe CAVALLARO wrote:
On 09/27/2010 12:37 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:14:24AM +0200, Giuseppe CAVALLARO wrote:
Signed-off-by: Giuseppe Cavallaro peppe.cavall...@st.com
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 07:54:53AM +0200, Peppe CAVALLARO wrote:
Hello
I wonder if you could review the three patches I sent the mailing list:
especially the following ones:
I intend to have a closer look at them, but please give me a few days. I
first need to get my official tasks done...
On 09/24/2010 11:04 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 07:54:53AM +0200, Peppe CAVALLARO wrote:
Hello
I wonder if you could review the three patches I sent the mailing list:
especially the following ones:
I intend to have a closer look at them, but please give me a few days. I
11 matches
Mail list logo
