From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/12] mmc: sdhci: add support for auto CMD23 Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2011 16:40:16 +0100 Message-ID: <201102181640.16398.arnd@arndb.de> References: <1297762510-2696-1-git-send-email-arindam.nath@amd.com> <201102181408.35946.arnd@arndb.de> <6C03668EAF45B747AF947A1603D1B300DCED195D@SAUSEXMBP01.amd.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de ([212.227.17.8]:57650 "EHLO moutng.kundenserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753889Ab1BRPkX (ORCPT ); Fri, 18 Feb 2011 10:40:23 -0500 In-Reply-To: <6C03668EAF45B747AF947A1603D1B300DCED195D@SAUSEXMBP01.amd.com> Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org To: "Nath, Arindam" Cc: zhangfei gao , "cjb@laptop.org" , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" , "Su, Henry" , "Lu, Aaron" , "anath.amd@gmail.com" On Friday 18 February 2011, Nath, Arindam wrote: > Auto CMD23 is a feature that automatically issues a CMD23 before > a CMD18 or CMD25 is sent. Objective of this function is to avoid > performance deterioration during memory access by removing interrupt > service of CMD23. I feel a bit stupid now, I confused CMD23 and ACMD23. I thought that this was about automatic insertion of ACMD23, which it is clearly not. I still think we should do *ACMD23* in the block driver, but see no reason for CMD23. Arnd