From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161866AbXD1RHd (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Apr 2007 13:07:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1756443AbXD1RHd (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Apr 2007 13:07:33 -0400 Received: from ik-out-1112.google.com ([66.249.90.181]:32869 "EHLO ik-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756438AbXD1RHb (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Apr 2007 13:07:31 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=YOPk5tzTKxrN22qTNanftkgvfWDSO90O0S32avOkh2963KWsgIerlK5Yg6FKB6ouo6ga9FlKjS6dBlKRxnRH8GWT9T/2XKgNlAtwTIQ6ltxAAtFqLHVW51YHGT1VQp+YPTBEwweXouhFPq9r8mDztUTGSLWdU1jTY3c5JO+GK4g= Message-ID: <46337F56.3010904@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 20:07:34 +0300 From: Sergey Yanovich User-Agent: Icedove 1.5.0.10 (X11/20070329) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alex Dubov CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Pierre Ossman Subject: Re: [mmc] alternative TI FM MMC/SD driver for 2.6.21-rc7 References: <257974.51495.qm@web36707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <257974.51495.qm@web36707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=KOI8-R; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Alex Dubov wrote: > I prepared a tarball with 2.6.21 compatible driver (tifm-0.8e on berlios). This is "good enough" to withdraw my patch. I have filed it to http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=11312&action=view in bug 8052 http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8052 which seems to be resolved by the patch. > I don't see any problems on stock 2.6.21.1. Well, this version seem to ignore cards which are present at load. I have this output: ~$ check once Loading module tifm_sd ... Checking for a card at /dev/mmcblk0p1 ... failed. for this script: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/attachment.cgi?id=11317&action=view and you can can see this bug for more details: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8393