Can we just remove the quirk for broken timeout and just set the timeout to 0xe in sdhci.c? The problem with the quirk is you need to know when to set it and the problem with the existing quirk is that one has to set it to work with bad cards. ________________________________________ From: linux-mmc-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [linux-mmc-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jaehoon Chung [jh80.chung@xxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 3:37 AM To: Wolfram Sang Cc: linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Chris Ball; kyungmin Park; Andrew Morton; matt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: [RFC Patch] SDHCI: add quirk for data timeout value when card busy. >> Maybe, happen for all sdhci-controllers... > > My point is: If it is needed for all SDHCI-controllers, we don't need a > quirk and can apply your code unconditionally. > You're right. But i'm not sure, happen for all sdhci-controller. so i send to RFC patch.. I also hope apply my code unconditionally. the reason using quirk...every card didn't happen this issue.. if not happen this issue, we need not set timeout value..at that time.. when needs, entered and set timeout value..(conditionally) >> Card is configurable with eMMC spec..But sdhci-controller didn't >> support that card. So SDHCI controller need to use quriks.. > > Can we find out if this is a general issue? > Hmm..i'm sure you can find out this issue.. Have ever find out this issue(similar case)..anybody? > Regards, > > Wolfram > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
