Re: [RFC] thoughts about recent Samsung related patches

[Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1266 bytes --]


> > 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).
> 
> Okay it looks different from Samsung Spec.
> WIDE8[5]: Extended Data Transfer Width (It is for MMC 8-bit card).
> 1: 8-bit operatoin
> 0: Bit width is designated by the bit 1(Data Transfer Width)
> So no need to set the BIT 1 and BIT5 simultaneously.
> I also wonder other Specs how described it.

esdhc occupied BIT 2 (originally HI_SPD) for this :(
%10 means 8 bit transfer. %11 is reserved.

> Good, I think it's possible. I'll try and send a patch.

Thanks!

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Wolfram Sang                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

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