Hi, On Tue, Sep 18 2012, Kumar Gala wrote: >>>> I've got a mild preference for handling quirk assignment in the DT >>>> rather than in driver code, so I'd prefer to just push the original >>>> patch to mmc-next as-is. Does that sound okay? >>> >>> Why? I only ask because I agree with Scott that this means you have to >>> update your device tree to get proper functionality. >>> >> When the new silicon does not support CMD23, >> if we don't update the device tree, then we must update the SDHC driver. >> I prefer to add the property in device tree, >> because we just add this property in new device tree, we don't need more effort to modify driver. > > Jerry, > > I think doing it driver makes more sense because: > > 1. means older device tree's still work > 2. odds that CMD23 not being supported in future devices is near 0% > (Now that we support AutoCMD23 [and thus CMD23] we aren't likely to stop supporting it in future) > 3. If IP changes you are going to have to update driver anyways for new features > > I really think we should NOT utilize device tree for this. Of course, we could also make both (or perhaps neither) of you happy by merging both: if your DT says you don't support cmd23 *or* you hit the driver's blacklist, we avoid it. - 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
