From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750841AbVHRGie (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2005 02:38:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750844AbVHRGid (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2005 02:38:33 -0400 Received: from caramon.arm.linux.org.uk ([212.18.232.186]:62730 "EHLO caramon.arm.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750841AbVHRGi3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2005 02:38:29 -0400 Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 07:38:24 +0100 From: Russell King To: Andrew Morton Cc: Pierre Ossman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: Multi-sector writes Message-ID: <20050818073824.C2365@flint.arm.linux.org.uk> Mail-Followup-To: Andrew Morton , Pierre Ossman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <42FF3C05.70606@drzeus.cx> <20050817155641.12bb20fc.akpm@osdl.org> <43042114.7010503@drzeus.cx> <20050817224805.17f29cfb.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20050817224805.17f29cfb.akpm@osdl.org>; from akpm@osdl.org on Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 10:48:05PM -0700 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 17, 2005 at 10:48:05PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > Pierre Ossman wrote: > > > > >I'm thinking that it would be better to not have the config option there > > >and then re-add it late in the 2.6.14 cycle if someone reports problems > > >which cannot be fixed. Or at least make it default to 'y' so we get more > > >testing coverage, then remove the config option later. Or something. > > > > > >Thoughts? > > > > > > > > > > Removing it would be preferable by me. All that #ifdef tends to clutter > > up the code. After som initial problem with a buggy card everything has > > worked flawlesly. > > OK.. Please send an additional patch for that sometime? I'd rather not. The problem is that we have a host (thanks Intel) which is unable to report how many bytes were transferred before an error occurs. My fear is that doing anything other than sector by sector write will lead to corruption should an error occur. However, I've no way to induce such an error, so I can only base this on theory. It may work perfectly for the case when everything's operating correctly, but I suspect if you're going to do multi-sector writes, it'll all fall apart on the first error, especially on this host. -- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core