From: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de>
To: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org
Cc: pierre-list@ossman.eu, gdavis@mvista.com, cbouatmailru@gmail.com,
kyungmin.park@samsung.com, m.szyprowski@samsung.com,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: [RFC] thoughts about recent Samsung related patches
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2010 13:00:59 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100906110059.GC2617@pengutronix.de> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2040 bytes --]
Hi,
while working on the esdhc-controller for the imx-platform, I noticed
the recently comitted changes for Samsung controllers and have some
remarks (sorry for being late):
1) Checking conditions for of host->ops->get_min_clock
The original commit e9510176ff728135383f0cdfc9c90cfe57f9e162 (sdhci: be
more strict with get_min_clock() usage) states why the additional checks
were added. Under this light, it could be argued that commit
cfd1f82f20e0c557a061189f7d8c30d623fbe313 (sdhci: remove useless
set_clock() check) could be reverted and this commit
ce5f036bbbfc6c21d7b55b8fdaa2e2bd56392d94 (sdhci-s3c: add support for the
non standard minimal clock value) could also be reverted if the samsung
platform driver just uses SDHCI_QUIRK_NONSTANDARD_CLOCK without setting
ops->set_clock?
2) 8-Bit data transfer support
The comitted version ae6d6c92212e94b12ab9365c23fb73acc2c3c2e7 (sdhci:
8-bit data transfer width support) looks different from another RFC
posted in February:
http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org/msg01250.html
As those two already differ, I think it might be wiser to move
8-bit-mode-handling to the platform-specific code? Even the documented
features of a SDHC differ across implementations, I fear side-effects
when using this kind of undocumented feature (official spec says
"reserved" when describing this bit).
3) NO_HI_SPD
Commit 5193250168ccdf87364e35a11965336dc088578c (sdhci: add no hi-speed
bit quirk support) adds a quirk which can be avoided by using
io-accessors like in sdhci-of-esdhc.c. Maybe we can even get rid of
more, older quirks this way to save precious quirk flags. Have to check
that later.
I hope my comments are applicable; because there is no freely available
datasheet, I can't verify all of my assumptions. Looking forward to
comments.
Kind regards,
Wolfram
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
next reply other threads:[~2010-09-06 11:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-09-06 11:00 Wolfram Sang [this message]
2010-09-06 11:16 ` [RFC] thoughts about recent Samsung related patches Kyungmin Park
2010-09-06 12:05 ` Wolfram Sang
2010-09-13 12:31 ` Wolfram Sang
2010-09-14 0:05 ` Kyungmin Park
2010-09-14 10:28 ` cleaning up sdhci? (was Re: [RFC] thoughts about recent Samsung related patches) Wolfram Sang
2010-09-14 10:21 ` Alan Cox
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=20100906110059.GC2617@pengutronix.de \
--to=w.sang@pengutronix.de \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cbouatmailru@gmail.com \
--cc=gdavis@mvista.com \
--cc=kyungmin.park@samsung.com \
--cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.com \
--cc=pierre-list@ossman.eu \
/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