Hi Chris, Ian
AFAICS there are currently still a few tmio patch-series outstanding:
From: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski <at> gmx.de>
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] tmio_mmc: improve DMA reliability
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mmc/6485
From: Simon Horman <horms <at> verge.net.au>
Subject: [PATCH 0/4] [rfc v3] mmc, ARM: Add zboot from eSD support for SuperH
Mobile ARM
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mmc/6664
From: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski <at> gmx.de>
Subject: [PATCH 0/6] mmc: split the tmio driver into several modules
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.sh.devel/10304
From: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski <at> gmx.de>
Subject: [PATCH 0/4 v2] mmc: tmio: don't access nonexisting registers
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.sh.devel/10311
From: Guennadi Liakhovetski <g.liakhovetski <at> gmx.de>
Subject: [PATCH/RFC 0/2 v2] mmc: tmio: power management and clock gating
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mmc/6627
Of those the first patchset shouldn't have any issues.
I haven't followed discussions regarding the second patchset from Simon -
is it going to be applied as is, or is a new revision required?
If it is going to be applied, shall I rebase my remaining patches on top
of it or would you prefer Simon to rebase his patches (I think, he has
only one patch, touching tmio: [PATCH 1/4])? As for the rest of the
patches, IIRC, the only remaining issue, that I'll be fixing today is
Magnus' wish to allocate the bounce buffer dynamically. Although, I could
imagine doing that incrementally, because the #ifdef, that Magnus would
like to get rid of is already now in the code, it is not introduced by
these my patches. But I can redo my patches too, no problem.
What would be the preferred approach?
Thanks
Guennadi
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011, Ian Molton wrote:
> Sounds like a good idea... Its possible that I could implement DMA on
> the toshiba stuff too, can your code handle this?
>
> (I havent had time to read this yet)
>
> --
> Ian Molton
> Linux, Automotive, and other hacking:
> http://www.mnementh.co.uk/
>
>
>
> On 11 March 2011 07:51, Guennadi Liakhovetski <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hi all
> >
> > The tmio_mmc SD/SDIO driver is serving very different hardware
> > configurations: on the one hand multi-function style chips from Toshiba,
> > Compaq, on the other hand SDHI units in ARM- and SuperH-based sh-mobile
> > SoCs. Apart from the different native APIs: MFD for the former and
> > platform-device in the latter, sh-mobile implementations also have a
> > number of features, exclusive to them, which, if implemented in the common
> > driver, clutter it needlessly and make its maintenance more difficult.
> > This patch series simplifies the situation by splitting the driver up into
> > 3 modules: the core, consisting of the main part and, on sh-mobile, of the
> > DMA part; the mfd glue; and the platform glue. This way also (imaginary)
> > sh-mobile systems with additional tmio mfd chips on them can be supported.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Guennadi
> > ---
> > Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
> > Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
> > http://www.open-technology.de/
> >
>
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
