On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 02:54:53PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > Do you already fetch from Ulf's kernel.org tree? He switched away from > > > the Linaro tree for MMC for a while. I only realized when he complained > > "since a while" not "for a while", of course. > > > Thanks, I had not realised that. I've pulled the kernel.org tree. I have tested with "the new mmc/next" and things seem better. The problem does not appear to manifest in light testing. > So, there is hope for the patches to be in v4.11? :) On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 02:58:58PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Wolfram, > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Wolfram Sang <wsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 11:01:17AM +0100, Simon Horman wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 09:39:28AM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > >> > > Sorry for missing these. > >> > > I have queued them up for v4.11. > >> > > >> > Thank you! > >> > >> On my r8a7796/salvator-x I see the following with this series applied: > >> > >> sh_mobile_sdhi ee140000.sd: timeout waiting for hardware interrupt (CMD13) > > > > Do you have the HS200 enablement patches in that branch? They are > > currently in -next. > > I saw the same thing with renesas-devel last week, only on M3-W. > The same kernel on H3 didn't spew such messages. > According to Shimoda-san, it was due to different eMMCs on H3 and M3-W. Thanks, my interpretation of that is that the H3 patch of this series is fine. I am still of a mind to drop the M3-W patch of this series because unless we can control the order that things are merged into Linus's tree there will be a temporary regression there. Moreover I'm not very excited about renesas-next having regressed.
