On Thursday 30 October 2014 10:40:12 Adrian Hunter wrote: > On 30/10/14 10:05, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Thursday 30 October 2014 09:25:54 Adrian Hunter wrote: > >> On 21/10/14 12:26, Adrian Hunter wrote: > >>> Hi > >>> > >>> Here are patches to add 64-bit ADMA support to the SDHCI driver. > >>> > >>> The patchset starts with 3 minor fixes related to SDHCI ADMA, > >>> then there are 8 preparatory patches, then 3 main patches, then > >>> the mmc_test "Badly aligned" tests are extended slightly. > >> > >> Hi Ulf > >> > >> Can you take these? Note that there was a V2 of > >> "mmc: sdhci-acpi: Add 64-bit DMA support". Also > >> that patch is dependent (for functionality not > >> compilation) on a patch in v3.18-rc2 so it is slightly > >> preferable if you pull v3.18-rc2 first. > > > > You still haven't addressed my comments about clearing > > the SDHCI_USE_64_BIT_DMA flag if the platform finds that > > hardware has set this bit incorrectly. > > Yes I did. I said there was no need: > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-mmc&m=141449082331402&w=2 > > I would also note that the SDHCI spec does not say explicitly > that a 64-bit device supports 32-bit DMA descriptors. > > If the hardware really is broken, the SDHCI_QUIRK2_BROKEN_64_BIT_DMA > should be used. You also said that the flag is defined to mean that 64-bit DMA is working and that you want to show the warning when the hardware and the firmware disagree about this. If you have an (at least) 50% chance that the hardware is lying, you really shouldn't believe it. Arnd -- 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
