> -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Ball [mailto:cjb@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 12:09 AM > To: Huang Changming-R66093 > Cc: linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Huang Changming-R66093; Xie Shaohui-B21989; > Anton Vorontsov; Kumar Gala > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] powerpc/esdhc: disable CMD23 for some Freescale > SoCs > > Hi, > > On Fri, Sep 21 2012, r66093@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c > > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c > > @@ -143,6 +143,35 @@ static void esdhc_of_resume(struct sdhci_host > > *host) } #endif > > > > +static const u32 non_cmd23_processor_table[] = { > > + /* P1020 Dual/Single core */ > > + 0x80EC00, 0x80E400, 0x80ED00, 0x80E500, > > + /* P1021 Dual/Single core */ > > + 0x80EC01, 0x80E401, 0x80ED01, 0x80E501, > > + /* P1022 Dual/Single core */ > > + 0x80EE00, 0x80E600, 0x80EF00, 0x80E700, > > + /* P1024 Dual/Single core */ > > + 0x80EC02, 0x80E402, 0x80ED02, 0x80E502, > > + /* P1025 Dual/Single core */ > > + 0x80EC03, 0x80E403, 0x80ED03, 0x80E503, > > + /* P4080 and P4040 */ > > + 0x820000, 0x820800, 0x820100, 0x820900 > > I don't see how this method improves on either of the previous two we've > discussed. If anything, Kumar's suggested method seems better than this > one: it detected the MMC IP revision, which I'd expect to be more > reliable than building a list of which SoCs contain that IP. > > Why is this better than using DT or detecting the MMC revision? > The first version, I use the DT, but someone don't like it. MPC8536 and P4080 have the same version: VVN1.0, but MPC8536 supports CMD23, P4080 can't support. no anyone can make sure all future silicones can support CMD23. So, I think if DT can't be used, it is the better way to detect the processor. -- 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
