From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Wolfram Sang Subject: Re: [PATCH (mmc-next) 1/3] mmc: add suspend/resume in the sdhci-pltfm driver (V3) Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2010 10:57:31 +0200 Message-ID: <20101004085731.GA10746@pengutronix.de> References: <1285663289-20283-1-git-send-email-peppe.cavallaro@st.com> <20100930232526.GA29636@void.printf.net> <4CA967F8.9030005@st.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt" Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([92.198.50.35]:58511 "EHLO metis.ext.pengutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753689Ab0JDI5g (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Oct 2010 04:57:36 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4CA967F8.9030005@st.com> Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org To: Peppe CAVALLARO Cc: Chris Ball , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" --pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > In the near future I'll have to start using SDIO and eMMC devices. > I wonder if I'll be able to continue to use the platform driver or if > I'll need to actually have own driver (to solve specific limits/features > .... due to our Hw) or if we'll extend the sdhci-pltfm d.d. >=20 > What do you think? First rule should be trying to extend pltfm. If all of the drafts we come up with don't seem reasonable, the "own driver" solution is the fallback. Regards, Wolfram --=20 Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | --pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkyplvsACgkQD27XaX1/VRvWzwCfQwxwrsxtk6D50uwr+1OSQIbQ 05cAoLnEe3JJpUMlBZBjN7/8Gl78T8AI =nW+2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt--