On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 03:31:22PM +0800, zhangfei gao wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 03:20:08AM +0100, Chris Ball wrote:
> >> Hi Matt,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:38:55PM +0100, Chris Ball wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 04
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 5:02 PM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 03:20:08AM +0100, Chris Ball wrote:
>> Hi Matt,
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:38:55PM +0100, Chris Ball wrote:
>> > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 04:11:42PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
>> > > Chris, are you OK to pick this
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 03:20:08AM +0100, Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:38:55PM +0100, Chris Ball wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 04:11:42PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> > > Chris, are you OK to pick this up (including Jaehoon's change)? Or
> > > would you prefer m
Hi Matt,
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 09:38:55PM +0100, Chris Ball wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 04:11:42PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> > Chris, are you OK to pick this up (including Jaehoon's change)? Or
> > would you prefer me to resubmit?
>
> Thanks, that's fine, I've applied both patches to mm
Hi Matt,
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 04:11:42PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> Chris, are you OK to pick this up (including Jaehoon's change)? Or
> would you prefer me to resubmit?
Thanks, that's fine, I've applied both patches to mmc-next:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/cjb/mmc.git;a=commi
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 04:11:42PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 10:27:14AM +0900, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
> > Matt Fleming wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 05:51:45PM +0900, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
> > >> Matt Fleming wrote:
> > >>> From: Jaehoon Chung
> > >>>
> > >>> If cont
On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 10:27:14AM +0900, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
> Matt Fleming wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 05:51:45PM +0900, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
> >> Matt Fleming wrote:
> >>> From: Jaehoon Chung
> >>>
> >>> If controller use SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_CARD_DETECTION quirk,
> >>> controller need al
Matt Fleming wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 05:51:45PM +0900, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
>> Matt Fleming wrote:
>>> From: Jaehoon Chung
>>>
>>> If controller use SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_CARD_DETECTION quirk,
>>> controller need always polling detect
>>>
>>> In this case, always generated interrupt.Because
On Thu, Sep 02, 2010 at 05:51:45PM +0900, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
> Matt Fleming wrote:
> > From: Jaehoon Chung
> >
> > If controller use SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_CARD_DETECTION quirk,
> > controller need always polling detect
> >
> > In this case, always generated interrupt.Because controller checked card
Matt Fleming wrote:
> From: Jaehoon Chung
>
> If controller use SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_CARD_DETECTION quirk,
> controller need always polling detect
>
> In this case, always generated interrupt.Because controller checked card
> status.
> I think that is not efficiently.
>
> But if card is nonremovabl
Acked-by: Kyungmin Park
On Sat, Aug 28, 2010 at 10:53 PM, Matt Fleming wrote:
> From: Jaehoon Chung
>
> If controller use SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_CARD_DETECTION quirk,
> controller need always polling detect
>
> In this case, always generated interrupt.Because controller checked card
> status.
> I
From: Jaehoon Chung
If controller use SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_CARD_DETECTION quirk,
controller need always polling detect
In this case, always generated interrupt.Because controller checked card status.
I think that is not efficiently.
But if card is nonremovable, we need not always polling.
So i ad
12 matches
Mail list logo