> important issue needs to be fixed in the release. Please find some
> time to do a full review, if possible. We need your ack to know if
> the patch stands :)
Huh, my ack is needed for the linaro-kernel? :) Isn't it possible to
replace a V1 patch with a V2 patch in later kernels?
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/esdhc.h b/arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/esdhc.h
> > > index 86003f4..fced348 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/esdhc.h
> > > +++ b/arch/arm/plat-mxc/include/mach/esdhc.h
> > > @@ -10,17 +10,32 @@
> > > #ifndef __ASM_ARCH_IMX_ESDHC_H
> > > #define __ASM_ARCH_IMX_ESDHC_H
> > >
> > > +enum wp_types {
> > > + ESDHC_WP_NONE, /* no WP, neither signal nor gpio */
> > > + ESDHC_WP_SIGNAL, /* mmc internal WP signal */
> >
> > I think SIGNAL is not descriptive enough. Maybe
> >
> We have the document telling it's internal.
>
> > ESDHC_WP_INTERNAL /* WP routed directly to mmc controller */
> >
> I thought about that. If we use ESDHC_WP_INTERNAL, ESDHC_WP_GPIO
> should probably be the ESDHC_WP_EXTERNAL for the couple naming. But
> I like ESDHC_WP_GPIO over ESDHC_WP_EXTERNAL, so chose the couple
> naming of ESDHC_WP_GPIO vs. ESDHC_WP_SIGNAL.
ESDHC_WP_CONTROLLER? Or ESDHC_WP_CORE?
> > ? It should be mentioned on which SoCs this is not available?
> >
> From SoC/controller POV, it's all available. It's really a board
> design choice to connect card CD/WP to the pads or not, which the
> controller CD/WP signal/function is available on.
For mx25/35, I tried to find muxer settings but couldn't find them. It
seemed to me, GPIO is the only option there (I think I even asked
Richard). Can you route them on mx25/35, too?
Regards,
Wolfram
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
