On 30/10/14 12:00, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > 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. Just because there are two options does not mean they are each equally likely. -- 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
