From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Ball Subject: Re: [PATCH] sdhci-esdhc-imx: fix timeout on i.MX's sdhci Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 20:45:16 +0100 Message-ID: <20101019194516.GA28424@void.printf.net> References: <1287492541-3060-1-git-send-email-eric@eukrea.com> <20101019150743.GA26784@pengutronix.de> <4CBDB694.4000209@eukrea.com> <20101019193638.GB31336@pengutronix.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from void.printf.net ([89.145.121.20]:53500 "EHLO void.printf.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756875Ab0JSTpT (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Oct 2010 15:45:19 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20101019193638.GB31336@pengutronix.de> Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org To: Wolfram Sang Cc: Eric =?iso-8859-1?Q?B=E9nard?= , r65037@freescale.com, linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, shawn.gsc@gmail.com On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 09:36:38PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > I do have, but I can't do the tests until next week because of other priorities. > > I'd suggest to add a proper patch next week then (maybe together with correct > usage of the MULTIBLOCK-quirk, too?). It's a new driver, so adding update > patches late in the cycle should not cause problems? Of course, Chris makes the > final decision about that. Fine with me, tested patches are good. There's no need to rush to get it in before -rc1. Thanks, -- Chris Ball One Laptop Per Child