[PATCH] OMAP MMC fixes

[PATCH] OMAP MMC fixes

[Marek Vašut]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 175 bytes --]

Hi,
omap mmc driver doesnt use data->blksz_bits anymore in 2619. It uses only 
data->blksz . Enclosed patch fixes it.

Signed-off-by: Marek Vašut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #2: omap-mmc-blksz-fix.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-diff, Size: 691 bytes --]

--- linux-omap-dev/drivers/mmc/omap.c	2006-10-28 01:37:40.000000000 +0200
+++ linux-omap/drivers/mmc/omap.c	2006-10-28 20:20:11.000000000 +0200
@@ -633,10 +633,10 @@
 	int sync_dev = 0;
 
 	data_addr = host->phys_base + OMAP_MMC_REG_DATA;
-	frame = 1 << data->blksz_bits;
+	frame = 1 << data->blksz;
 	count = sg_dma_len(sg);
 
-	if ((data->blocks == 1) && (count > (1 << data->blksz_bits)))
+	if ((data->blocks == 1) && (count > (1 << data->blksz)))
 		count = frame;
 
 	host->dma_len = count;
@@ -825,7 +825,7 @@
 	}
 
 
-	block_size = 1 << data->blksz_bits;
+	block_size = 1 << data->blksz;
 
 	OMAP_MMC_WRITE(host, NBLK, data->blocks - 1);
 	OMAP_MMC_WRITE(host, BLEN, block_size - 1);

[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 0 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] OMAP MMC fixes

[Marek Vašut]

oops, sorry, I missed the previous patch ...

Dne sobota 28 říjen 2006 20:34 jste napsal(a):
> Hi,
> omap mmc driver doesnt use data->blksz_bits anymore in 2619. It uses only
> data->blksz . Enclosed patch fixes it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marek Vašut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>

Re: [PATCH] OMAP MMC fixes

[Dirk Behme]

Marek Vašut wrote:
> oops, sorry, I missed the previous patch ...

;)

To get it right: You used 1 << data->blksz in your patch. I 
think it should only be data->blksz without additional shift 
because shift is already included in data->blksz?

http://source.mvista.com/git/gitweb.cgi?p=linux-omap-2.6.git;a=blobdiff;h=5b9caa7978d34311839840243e38921255f6da4b;hp=74eaaee66de0e59532ba5655fddac5aaeea5ba08;hb=132919ba80ad207755fe271277bfefff865a54fe;f=drivers/mmc/mmc.c

So, do you think

http://linux.omap.com/pipermail/linux-omap-open-source/2006-October/008183.html

is correct?

Thanks

Dirk