Hi,
On Fri, Dec 02 2011, Huang Changming-R66093 wrote:
I don't think it make sense to change the delay time.
Which will affect all PowerPC eSDHC controller, could you confirm
which can work on all PowerPC platform?
No, of course not, but that's why I said we can put the patch in
mmc-next and
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 22 2011, Tony Lin wrote:
1ms is enough for hardware to change the clock to stable.
100ms is too long in the tasklet.
Signed-off-by: Tony Lin tony@freescale.com
CC: Xiaobo Xie x@freescale.com
CC: Anton Vorontsov avoront...@ru.mvista.com
---
; avoront...@ru.mvista.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mmc: sdhci-esdhc: Change delay after setting
clock from 100ms to 1ms
Hi,
On Tue, Nov 22 2011, Tony Lin wrote:
1ms is enough for hardware to change the clock to stable.
100ms is too long in the tasklet.
Signed-off-by: Tony Lin tony
Sent: Friday, December 02, 2011 1:37 PM
To: Chris Ball
Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org; Xie
Xiaobo-R63061; avoront...@ru.mvista.com
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/1] mmc: sdhci-esdhc: Change delay after setting clock
from 100ms to 1ms
Okay
Thanks
-Original Message
1ms is enough for hardware to change the clock to stable.
100ms is too long in the tasklet.
Signed-off-by: Tony Lin tony@freescale.com
CC: Xiaobo Xie x@freescale.com
CC: Anton Vorontsov avoront...@ru.mvista.com
---
drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc.h |2 +-
1 files changed, 1
-Original Message-
From: Wolfram Sang [mailto:w.s...@pengutronix.de]
Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 1:55 PM
To: Lin Tony-B19295
Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org;
c...@laptop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mmc: sdhci-esdhc: Change delay after
1ms is enough for hardware to change the clock to stable.
100ms is too long.
Signed-off-by: Tony Lin tony@freescale.com
---
drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc.h |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc.h b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc.h
On Thu, Sep 01, 2011 at 01:51:15PM +0800, Tony Lin wrote:
1ms is enough for hardware to change the clock to stable.
100ms is too long.
How do you know that? Can you be sure for PowerPC as well? Have you researched
why the original author of the code has chosen that value? If so, please update
