Chris Ball wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
Hi :-)
> This wasn't merged, after some questions from Kyungmin Park -- is
> the patch still desirable?
>
This patch is being in mainline now.
(Commit ID: 3fe42e077f65351503f5004031549db330bb105e)
Thanks.
Best regards,
Kgene.
--
Kukjin Kim , Senior Engineer,
SW So
Hi,
This wasn't merged, after some questions from Kyungmin Park -- is
the patch still desirable?
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 08:39:51PM +0900, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> From: Lee Hyuk
>
> On Samsung's SDMMC hosts the timeout clock is derivied from the SD
> Clock, which is set dynamically.
> So, checked '
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> Kyungmin Park wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Kukjin Kim wrote:
>> > From: Lee Hyuk
>> >
>> > On Samsung's SDMMC hosts the timeout clock is derivied from the SD
>> > Clock, which is set dynamically.
>> > So, checked 'SD
Kyungmin Park wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> > From: Lee Hyuk
> >
> > On Samsung's SDMMC hosts the timeout clock is derivied from the SD
> > Clock, which is set dynamically.
> > So, checked 'SDHCI_QUIRK_DATA_TIMEOUT_USES_SDCLK' quirk and removed
> > 'sdh
Hi,
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Kukjin Kim wrote:
> From: Lee Hyuk
>
> On Samsung's SDMMC hosts the timeout clock is derivied from the SD
> Clock, which is set dynamically.
> So, checked 'SDHCI_QUIRK_DATA_TIMEOUT_USES_SDCLK' quirk and removed
> 'sdhci_s3c_get_timeout_clk' callback which doe
From: Lee Hyuk
On Samsung's SDMMC hosts the timeout clock is derivied from the SD
Clock, which is set dynamically.
So, checked 'SDHCI_QUIRK_DATA_TIMEOUT_USES_SDCLK' quirk and removed
'sdhci_s3c_get_timeout_clk' callback which doesn't need any more.
Signed-off-by: Hyuk Lee
Signed-off-by: Kukjin
