From: Chris Ball <cjb@laptop.org>
To: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de>
Cc: Philip Rakity <prakity@marvell.com>,
"Dong, Chuanxiao" <chuanxiao.dong@intel.com>,
Jae hoon Chung <jh80.chung@gmail.com>,
"linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"arnd@arndb.de" <arnd@arndb.de>,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1]mmc: set timeout for SDHCI host before sending busy cmd
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 21:24:30 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110224212429.GB12913@void.printf.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110224204352.GB9841@pengutronix.de>
Hi,
On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 09:43:52PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> +1. A full cycle in linux-next might an idea to be on the safe side? That
> would be 2.6.40-material then. Or too slow?
I think it could be okay to merge for .39, but that's mainly because I
don't think we start getting testing with a lot of cards until patches
appear in an -rc1 -- so for something that requires broad testing, I'd
rather merge it for -rc1 with a plan to revert it if we find anything
unexpected.
But I don't have a strong opinion, so if anyone thinks there's a reason
to wait (for example, an existence-proof of a card that misbehaves when
configured with a max timeout value) then I'm happy to do so.
Thanks,
--
Chris Ball <cjb@laptop.org> <http://printf.net/>
One Laptop Per Child
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-24 21:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-24 11:19 [PATCH 1/1]mmc: set timeout for SDHCI host before sending busy cmd Chuanxiao Dong
2011-02-24 14:18 ` Jae hoon Chung
2011-02-24 14:54 ` Dong, Chuanxiao
2011-02-24 18:32 ` Philip Rakity
2011-02-24 20:15 ` Chris Ball
2011-02-24 20:43 ` Wolfram Sang
2011-02-24 21:24 ` Chris Ball [this message]
2011-02-25 1:25 ` Philip Rakity
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110224212429.GB12913@void.printf.net \
--to=cjb@laptop.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=chuanxiao.dong@intel.com \
--cc=jh80.chung@gmail.com \
--cc=kyungmin.park@samsung.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=prakity@marvell.com \
--cc=w.sang@pengutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox