Hi, On Tue, Nov 22 2011, Tony Lin wrote: > 1ms is enough for hardware to change the clock to stable. > 100ms is too long in the tasklet. > > Signed-off-by: Tony Lin <tony.lin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > CC: Xiaobo Xie <X.Xie@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > CC: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc.h | 2 +- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc.h b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc.h > index c3b08f1..b97b2f5 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc.h > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc.h > @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ static inline void esdhc_set_clock(struct sdhci_host > *host, unsigned int clock) > | (div << ESDHC_DIVIDER_SHIFT) > | (pre_div << ESDHC_PREDIV_SHIFT)); > sdhci_writel(host, temp, ESDHC_SYSTEM_CONTROL); > - mdelay(100); > + mdelay(1); > out: > host->clock = clock; > } I don't know if 1ms is actually long enough for the clock to stabilize on all boards, but I'll push this change to mmc-next and we can see if we get any regression reports. Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball <cjb@xxxxxxxxxx> <http://printf.net/> One Laptop Per Child -- 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
