On Mon, Oct 10, 2011 at 10:23:02AM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > Linus Walleij wrote: >> On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 11:10 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux >> <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Fri, Oct 07, 2011 at 03:45:48PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>> >>> Well, the patch system says that each one depends on the previous one, >>> and the first one in the series contains the PIO read thing. >>> >>> Do 7108/1 onwards depend on 7106/1 and 7107/1 ? >> >> Probably my fault, since I was helping Ulf out with the patch tracker >> introduction. >> >> The patches should be pretty much semantically orthogonal as >> far as I can tell, the only reason dependency was stated that way >> was that I couldn't tell from head-parsing whether there were >> syntactical dependencies. (And wanted to avoid the annoyance >> of non-applying patches...) >> >> So if they apply, they are independent AFAICT. > > 7108/1 and 7109/1, have real dependencies. Otherwise there none. Ok, I assume that those depend on the first two patches. So, I tried applying 7110/1 .. 7112/1 but the first rejects because it doesn't have the non-power-of-2 support patch applied (7107/1). And it seems sensible that 7107/1 depends on 7106/1 (the PIO patch) which I believe to be a problem. Therefore, I don't think any of these can be applied without the initial PIO patch. One thing I haven't yet mentioned is about the non-power-of-2 support - surely this can only be supported if blksz_datactrl16 is set? If so, shouldn't it key off that? I don't see how it could otherwise support non-power of 2 block sizes with just a log2 of the block size programmed into the data control register. -- 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
