From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Ball Subject: Re: [RFC] mmc: sdhci: work around broken dma boundary behavior Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 17:05:12 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20110314172129.GA20654@pengutronix.de> <1301388814-10931-1-git-send-email-mmvinni@yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from void.printf.net ([89.145.121.20]:43770 "EHLO void.printf.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754239Ab1DKVAa (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Apr 2011 17:00:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1301388814-10931-1-git-send-email-mmvinni@yahoo.com> (Mikko Vinni's message of "Tue, 29 Mar 2011 11:53:34 +0300") Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org To: Mikko Vinni Cc: Wolfram Sang , linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org Hi Wolfram, On Tue, Mar 29 2011, Mikko Vinni wrote: > In my opinion this is more risky than the original patch because this > will affect the behavior on all controllers that use sdhci, and not > just on those ones that don't update SDHCI_DMA_ADDRESS themselves. > Comments welcome! Any thoughts on which of the two approaches you prefer? Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball One Laptop Per Child