Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> Eric Anholt <eric@xxxxxxxxxx> hat am 19. Januar 2016 um 22:00 geschrieben: >> >> >> Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > This patch series based on the suggestion of Scott Branden to implement >> > bcm2835 support into sdhci-iproc [1]. >> > >> > These changes provide the following advantages: >> > * no need to maintain a separate driver for bcm2835 >> > * improve support and test coverage of bcm2835 mmc support >> > * get the rid of SDHCI_CAPABILITIES hack in bcm2835_sdhci_readl >> > * increase write performance by avoiding delays in write ops >> > >> > Patch 1 and 2 adopt two sdhci-bcm2835 fixes to sdhci-iproc. The third patch >> > tries to specify as much quirks as possible in the bcm283x.dtsi as possible. >> > Patch 4 and 5 are the actually changes for bcm2835 support. >> > >> > These series has been tested on Raspberry Pi B with dd (direct I/O): >> > >> > sdhci-bcm2835 >> > >> > 378 kB/s WRITE >> > 10,6 MB/s READ >> > >> > sdhci-iproc (after applying patch series) >> > >> > 881 kB/s WRITE >> > 10,8 MB/s READ >> >> I started a while ago at looking at merging the sdhost driver (for the >> other controller on these boards that you can use instead), since >> apparently the hardware's a better choice to use. This looks like a >> really nice simplification for us for the Arasan mode, though. Would >> you also want to delete the old 2835 driver after this series? > > Yes, that would be a necessary step. I don't know when it's the right time. > > What is the usual procedure for such a necessary driver? If the kernel still supports the hardware, just in a different source file, I don't see any problem with removing it immediately.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
