public inbox for linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pierre Ossman <pierre@ossman.eu>
To: Philip Langdale <philipl@overt.org>
Cc: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@csr.com>,
	Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@bencohen.org>,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, ian@mnementh.co.uk,
	matt@console-pimps.org, roberto.foglietta@gmail.com,
	linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sdio: add MMC_CAP_VDD_165_195 host capability
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 20:38:26 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091008203826.5e027347@mjolnir.ossman.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090929231013.5d67b36a@fido2.homeip.net>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1869 bytes --]

On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 23:10:13 -0700
Philip Langdale <philipl@overt.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 23:37:32 +0200
> Pierre Ossman <pierre@ossman.eu> wrote:
> 
> > I must have missed that part of discussion. If the voltage fully
> > overlaps with the MMC definition, then I don't see the controllers
> > having to be designed explicitly for SD 3.0. If not, then we probably
> > need a new voltage bit for the hosts. In that case separating
> > supporting from non-supporting should sort itself out easily.
> 
> The reason I think we need is a host cap is that low voltage operations
> apparently implies different signal timings. This is second hand from
> David as there are no public specs for 3.0 available yet. So, the
> failure case is a controller that publishes support for low voltage,
> but only expects MMC cards to use it.
> 
> In practice, I expect that the timings are close enough that this will
> work anyway, but I think the situation is analogous to HS-MMC vs HS-SD.
> There the timings are slightly different and you felt it was enough to
> justify a separate host cap for each one.
> 

It's difficult to say without seeing the spec. But if things are not
backwards compatible, then we should probably add either a new timing
mode, or a new bus mode (where we have open drain and push pull today).

> In fact, thinking about it in those terms, it suggests we need to
> retroactively introduce a reduced-voltage MMC host flag too, just in
> case SDHCI 3.0 controllers barf on those cards...
> 

Maybe. Again, it's difficult to say without seeing the specifics of the
new specification.

Rgds
-- 
     -- Pierre Ossman

  WARNING: This correspondence is being monitored by the
  Swedish government. Make sure your server uses encryption
  for SMTP traffic and consider using PGP for end-to-end
  encryption.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2009-10-08 18:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-09-28 17:51 [PATCH] sdio: add MMC_CAP_VDD_165_195 host capability Ohad Ben-Cohen
2009-09-28 18:09 ` David Vrabel
2009-09-28 20:02   ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2009-09-29  2:25   ` Philip Langdale
2009-09-29 18:28     ` Pierre Ossman
2009-09-29 20:20       ` Philip Langdale
2009-09-29 21:37         ` Pierre Ossman
2009-09-30  6:10           ` Philip Langdale
2009-10-08 18:38             ` Pierre Ossman [this message]
2009-10-10 18:42               ` Philip Langdale
2009-10-12 13:11                 ` David Vrabel
2009-10-13  2:39                   ` Philip Langdale
2009-10-14  7:56                     ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2009-10-14  8:48                       ` Pierre Ossman
2009-10-14 10:34                         ` David Vrabel
2009-10-14 11:05                           ` Pierre Ossman
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-09-28 17:55 Ohad Ben-Cohen
2009-09-28 17:58 Ohad Ben-Cohen
2009-09-28 18:10 ` Matt Fleming
2009-09-28 20:10   ` Ohad Ben-Cohen
2009-09-28 22:59   ` Andrew Morton
2009-09-29  5:53     ` Matt Fleming

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20091008203826.5e027347@mjolnir.ossman.eu \
    --to=pierre@ossman.eu \
    --cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=david.vrabel@csr.com \
    --cc=ian@mnementh.co.uk \
    --cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=matt@console-pimps.org \
    --cc=ohad@bencohen.org \
    --cc=philipl@overt.org \
    --cc=roberto.foglietta@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox