From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfgang Denk Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2010 11:22:57 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mmc: seperate block number into small parts for multi-write cmd In-Reply-To: References: <1283757567-15161-1-git-send-email-leiwen@marvell.com> <4C84B322.1000500@emk-elektronik.de> <4C84BF66.8080704@emk-elektronik.de> <4C84D599.4030100@emk-elektronik.de> <20101010064822.ED08C14F310@gemini.denx.de> Message-ID: <20101010092257.154CE1508A2@gemini.denx.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Dear Lei Wen, In message you wrote: > > > Please explain why that shouldnot be possible. It's the driver that > > accesses your hardware, so it has full control over everything going > > on. > > > You are right, certainly driver cuold make this, but this would bring > a lot of complexity for it... > As I mentioned in the last mail, the multi-write command semantic > consist by multi-write command + stop transmission command. > > Send what kind of command is the job of platform, and how to send the > command is the job of driver. > If I implement this seperation in the driver level, the driver must > send another stop transmission command during each internal > seperation, > which is so ugly and error prone.. > > So this is why I intend to put the code in the platform level... But my (limited!) understanding is that it's not a platform problem you are solving, but one of this special kind of controller, which nobody else would ever run into. Is this understanding correct? Best regards, Wolfgang Denk -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany Phone: (+49)-8142-66989-10 Fax: (+49)-8142-66989-80 Email: wd at denx.de Real computer scientists despise the idea of actual hardware. Hard- ware has limitations, software doesn't. It's a real shame that Turing machines are so poor at I/O.