Hi, adding Kevin, On Mon, Nov 05 2012, Philip Rakity wrote: > On Nov 5, 2012, at 1:11 PM, Chris Ball <cjb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> On Mon, Nov 05 2012, Philip Rakity wrote: >>> Hi Daneil, Chris, >>> >>> I reviewed kevin's patch in September which fixes this issue. Chris >>> -- can we pull it into mmc-next ? This patch is okay as a standalone >>> change. > > That was the original intent. > > The question is what to do if no regulator. regulator_get was > returning NULL in Daniel;s case. > IS_ERR patch was not taken so UHS support was removed. > The intent of the original code was to remove UHS support if there was > a regulator but it could not support voltage switching. So this patch does fix a real bug, other than the pr_info -- by affecting whether we disable UHS in the else clause -- and the commit message doesn't mention the existence of that real bug at all, and performs a cosmetic fix for vmmc at the same time as a semantic fix for vqmmc. That's terrible. I'll merge Kevin's patch after adding a commit message that explains what's actually going on. Thanks, - 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
