Hi, > The main problem is that the ancient Freescale 2.6.35 kernel is using > the "mx_sdhci" driver, while in 3.3.0-rc6+ the generic "sdhci" driver is > used, so it's not possible to simply compare the changes between the two > versions. :-( Not via diff, but the structure of both drivers should still be somewhat similar. > Probably this is a question for the Freescale people: why was the > "mx_sdhci" necessary at all It probably was never necessary, it was just easier to hack on a forked driver, because you can't break other sdhci-users, I guess. Since large portions of the code are duplicated but issues have been fixed in a very, ahem, custom manner, this was never suitable for mainline. Back then, most vendors thought this is good enough. Luckily, times have changed a bit. > and why is it not necessary any more? Because I wanted SD support in mainline, so I had to take a different path. > Any help, hints and historical informations are highly appreciated, > before I start to look deeper into this problem. They don't have a common ancestor. Just dig into both, you will recognize patterns, I guess. Regards, Wolfram -- Pengutronix e.K. | Wolfram Sang | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
