Chris,

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Ball [mailto:cjb at laptop.org]
Sent: Wednesday, September 22, 2010 6:13 PM
To: Ghorai, Sukumar
Cc: Adrian Hunter; linux-mmc at vger.kernel.org; linux-arm-
kernel at lists.infradead.org; Russell King - ARM Linux
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: failure of block read wait for long time

On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 11:02:08AM +0530, Ghorai, Sukumar wrote:

quoted

Would you please review and merge this patch [1] (attached too)?
[1] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mmc/2714

I've been following the thread.  I believe Adrian has NACKed this patch,
by saying "It is absolutely unacceptable to return I/O errors to the
upper layers for segments that do not have errors."

[Ghorai] 
I think Russell also mentioned his opinion. Would you please add your idea too?

1. I would prefer Adrian to explain again what this statement means, in the context - data read fail and how we make it success? 

2. if data read fail for sector(x) why we have to try for sector(x+1, ..x+n)?

3. how to inform reader function which sector having the valid data out of (1...n) sectors.

4. do we have any driver/code in Linux or any other os, which give inter-leave data and return as success?  

I think it's possible to merge patches to improve the situation (such
as the idea of noticing a card disappearing earlier), but your initial
patch is not the patch to do that.  You should continue to work with
Adrian -- when he's happy that a patch does not break the semantics
above, we can consider merging it.

Thanks,

--
Chris Ball   [off-list ref]   <http://printf.net/>
One Laptop Per Child