On Tuesday, August 29, 2012, Jaehoon Chung jh80.ch...@samsung.com wrote:
On 08/29/2012 10:21 AM, Seungwon Jeon wrote:
On Tuesday, August 28, 2012, Jaehoon Chung jh80.ch...@samsung.com wrote:
This patch is added the use_hold_reg bit in CMD register.
In upper version than 2.40a, bit[29] of
On 08/30/2012 10:36 AM, Seungwon Jeon wrote:
On Tuesday, August 29, 2012, Jaehoon Chung jh80.ch...@samsung.com wrote:
On 08/29/2012 10:21 AM, Seungwon Jeon wrote:
On Tuesday, August 28, 2012, Jaehoon Chung jh80.ch...@samsung.com wrote:
This patch is added the use_hold_reg bit in CMD register.
On 28 August 2012 13:25, Jaehoon Chung jh80.ch...@samsung.com wrote:
This patch is added the use_hold_reg bit in CMD register.
In upper version than 2.40a, bit[29] of CMD register is used the use_hold_reg.
Some SoC is affected by this bit.
(This bit means whether use hold register when send
On Tuesday, August 28, 2012, Jaehoon Chung jh80.ch...@samsung.com wrote:
This patch is added the use_hold_reg bit in CMD register.
In upper version than 2.40a, bit[29] of CMD register is used the use_hold_reg.
Some SoC is affected by this bit.
(This bit means whether use hold register when
On 08/29/2012 10:21 AM, Seungwon Jeon wrote:
On Tuesday, August 28, 2012, Jaehoon Chung jh80.ch...@samsung.com wrote:
This patch is added the use_hold_reg bit in CMD register.
In upper version than 2.40a, bit[29] of CMD register is used the
use_hold_reg.
Some SoC is affected by this bit.