On 08/21/2012 09:48 AM, Chris Ball wrote: > Hi, adding Shawn and Wolfram, snip... > Rob Herring said: >> This makes the most sense to me. However, I prefer broken-cd over >> cd-internal. The binding should add properties for exceptions, not SDHCI >> spec compliant implementations. > > Agreed, I was going to say the same thing. Putting it all together, it > sounds like we want: > > no extra properties: the CD pin on the host just works. > broken-cd: the CD pin on the host is broken; use polling. > cd-gpios: the GPIO listed is the CD pin on the host being > brought out directly to a GPIO. > cd-external: when used with cd-gpios, specifies that the GPIO > in cd-gpios is external to the CD pin on the host. > > cd-gpios and cd-external can be present on the same node. if broken-cd > is present, it must be the only one of these nodes used. I don't see the point of cd-external. Either you just use the CD interrupt defined within the SDHCI or you have a gpio line independent of the SDHCI and use cd-gpios. Rob -- 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
