Best Regards Jerry Huang > -----Original Message----- > From: linux-mmc-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-mmc- > owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Huang Changming-R66093 > Sent: Monday, September 24, 2012 10:37 AM > To: Kumar Gala; Chris Ball > Cc: linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Xie Shaohui-B21989; Anton Vorontsov > Subject: RE: [PATCH v3] powerpc/esdhc: disable CMD23 for some Freescale > SoCs > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Kumar Gala [mailto:galak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 2:36 AM > > To: Chris Ball > > Cc: Huang Changming-R66093; linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Huang > > Changming- R66093; Xie Shaohui-B21989; Anton Vorontsov > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] powerpc/esdhc: disable CMD23 for some > > Freescale SoCs > > > > > > On Sep 21, 2012, at 11:08 AM, Chris Ball wrote: > > > > > 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? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > I feel like I missed this patch, but I'd rather we go with the version > > I sent since the # of IP versions we have is 3 or 4, instead of the 30 > > or > > 40 SoCs we have. > > > MPC8536 and P4080 have the same IP version (VVN1.0), but MPC8536 support > CMD23, P4080 can't, how to handle these two silicones? > For the future silicones, no one can make sure all silicones support > CMD23. > don't say almost 0%, which just is the assumption, otherwise, why p4080 > can't support it and mpc8536 can? MPC837x has the same VVN1.0 as the MPC8536 and p4080, which supports CMD23, too. -- 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
