From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Ball Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] powerpc/esdhc: disable CMD23 for some Freescale SoCs Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 12:08:49 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1348223135-6435-1-git-send-email-r66093@freescale.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from void.printf.net ([89.145.121.20]:36564 "EHLO void.printf.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752739Ab2IUQIj (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 Sep 2012 12:08:39 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1348223135-6435-1-git-send-email-r66093@freescale.com> (r66093@freescale.com's message of "Fri, 21 Sep 2012 18:25:35 +0800") Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org To: r66093@freescale.com Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, Jerry Huang , Shaohui Xie , Anton Vorontsov , Kumar Gala Hi, On Fri, Sep 21 2012, r66093@freescale.com wrote: > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c > @@ -143,6 +143,35 @@ static void esdhc_of_resume(struct sdhci_host *host) > } > #endif > > +static const u32 non_cmd23_processor_table[] = { > + /* P1020 Dual/Single core */ > + 0x80EC00, 0x80E400, 0x80ED00, 0x80E500, > + /* P1021 Dual/Single core */ > + 0x80EC01, 0x80E401, 0x80ED01, 0x80E501, > + /* P1022 Dual/Single core */ > + 0x80EE00, 0x80E600, 0x80EF00, 0x80E700, > + /* P1024 Dual/Single core */ > + 0x80EC02, 0x80E402, 0x80ED02, 0x80E502, > + /* P1025 Dual/Single core */ > + 0x80EC03, 0x80E403, 0x80ED03, 0x80E503, > + /* P4080 and P4040 */ > + 0x820000, 0x820800, 0x820100, 0x820900 I don't see how this method improves on either of the previous two we've discussed. If anything, Kumar's suggested method seems better than this one: it detected the MMC IP revision, which I'd expect to be more reliable than building a list of which SoCs contain that IP. Why is this better than using DT or detecting the MMC revision? Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball One Laptop Per Child