From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hans de Goede Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 12:39:33 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] sunxi: mmc: Always declare High Capacity capability In-Reply-To: <54EC3E13.8030905@redhat.com> References: <1424376202-9151-1-git-send-email-hdegoede@redhat.com> <686156F1-76B9-4DA6-9A96-24958A70778D@gmail.com> <54EC3E13.8030905@redhat.com> Message-ID: <54EC62F5.9010703@redhat.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi, On 24-02-15 10:02, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 23-02-15 18:45, Pantelis Antoniou wrote: >> Hi Hans, >> >>> On Feb 19, 2015, at 22:03 , Hans de Goede wrote: >>> >>> High Capacity (e)MMC cards work fine on sun4i / sun5i, and not having this >>> capability set causes u-boot to not recognize the eMMC on an Utoo P66 A13 >>> tablet, so always set it thereby fixing this. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede >>> --- >>> drivers/mmc/sunxi_mmc.c | 6 +----- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/sunxi_mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/sunxi_mmc.c >>> index ebfec7c..2233545 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/mmc/sunxi_mmc.c >>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/sunxi_mmc.c >>> @@ -449,11 +449,7 @@ struct mmc *sunxi_mmc_init(int sdc_no) >>> >>> cfg->voltages = MMC_VDD_32_33 | MMC_VDD_33_34; >>> cfg->host_caps = MMC_MODE_4BIT; >>> - cfg->host_caps |= MMC_MODE_HS_52MHz | MMC_MODE_HS; >>> -#if defined(CONFIG_MACH_SUN6I) || defined(CONFIG_MACH_SUN7I) || \ >>> - defined(CONFIG_MACH_SUN8I) || defined(CONFIG_MACH_SUN9I) >>> - cfg->host_caps |= MMC_MODE_HC; >>> -#endif >>> + cfg->host_caps |= MMC_MODE_HS_52MHz | MMC_MODE_HS | MMC_MODE_HC; >>> cfg->b_max = CONFIG_SYS_MMC_MAX_BLK_COUNT; >>> >>> cfg->f_min = 400000; >>> -- >>> 2.1.0 >> >> Thanks, applied. > > Thanks, but since this was touching only sunxi code this has already been > merged through the sunxi tree, if you rebase on the latest master this > should drop from your tree. Ah I see that Tom has already pulled from your tree too, so now the patch is upstream through both pulls, which git handles without problems, so we're good here. Regards, Hans