On 13 December 2012 12:45, Kevin Liu <keyuan.liu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 2012/12/13 Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx>: >> On 13 December 2012 11:11, Russell King - ARM Linux >> <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 10:04:46AM +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>>> Anyway, this need to be thought of as future step, since this patch is >>>> not changing anything to that sequence as Kevin also is pointing out. >>> >>> Given that Kevin is talking about stuff in sdhci as if it affects MMCI, >>> and that neither of you have picked that up, you're *still* not gaining >>> any confidence from me that you're actually thinking about the changes >>> you're making. So I'm not really caring about how many acks your patches >>> get, I'm still going to be reluctant to apply them without thinking about >>> them for a bit. >> >> MMCI is doing "pm_runtime_get_sync" in it suspend. So the same >> principles as Kevin is describing for sdhci goes for MMCI. Sorry if >> this was not clearly pointed out. >> > sorry for my unclear words. I just use sdhci directly to explain this. > It's similar for sdhci and mmci on this point. pm_runtime is > temporarily disabled during suspend/resume. > > Thanks > Kevin Russell, is this enough for convincing you that everything has been thought of in this patch? Can we merge this? Kind regards Ulf Hansson -- 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
