[PATCH 0/4] Extend sdhci-esdhc-imx card_detect and write_protect support for mx5

Shawn Guo [off-list ref] writes:

On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 01:13:29PM +0200, Arnaud Patard wrote:

quoted

Shawn Guo [off-list ref] writes:

Hi,

quoted

On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 06:42:48PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:

quoted

The card-present polling within sdhci based driver is very expensive
in terms of the impact to system performance.  We observe a few
system performance issues from Freescale and Linaro on mx5 platforms,
which have been proved card polling related.

The patch set extends the current sdhci-esdhc-imx card_detect and
write_protect support to cover mx5 platforms, and solves above
performance issues.

Shawn Guo (4):
      mmc: sdhci: fix interrupt storm from card detection
      mmc: sdhci-esdhc-imx: SDHCI_CARD_PRESENT does not get cleared
      mmc: sdhci-esdhc-imx: remove "WP" from flag ESDHC_FLAG_GPIO_FOR_CD_WP
      mmc: sdhci-esdhc-imx: extend card_detect and write_protect support

Hi Arnaud,

Any chance to play with it yet?

I tried applying the patch 4 (v2) on mmc git and Sascha Hauer's for-next
branch and failed. Can you please tell me on which tree should I apply
it ?

Sascha really should not picked up the following 3 patches.  They are
nonsense when driver is not even ready for the support.  These 3
patches have conflict with my patch set.  You should be able to
apply with these 3 removed.

They're still not applying. It's failing to failing
sdhci-esdhc-imx.c. I'm currently trying t make sure I didn't miss
something but it looks like the patch is not against for-next. For
instance, look at :
http://git.pengutronix.de/?p=imx/linux-2.6.git;a=blob;f=drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc-imx.c;h=a19967d0bfc48b0ce8216de0d1a727093ee9fa03;hb=refs/heads/for-next

It's already adding a esdhc_pltfm_get_ro() function, so I fail to see
how a patch adding a function with same name can work.

Thanks,
Arnaud

On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 04:29:57PM +0200, Arnaud Patard wrote:

Shawn Guo [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 01:13:29PM +0200, Arnaud Patard wrote:

quoted

Shawn Guo [off-list ref] writes:

Hi,

quoted

On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 06:42:48PM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:

quoted

The card-present polling within sdhci based driver is very expensive
in terms of the impact to system performance.  We observe a few
system performance issues from Freescale and Linaro on mx5 platforms,
which have been proved card polling related.

The patch set extends the current sdhci-esdhc-imx card_detect and
write_protect support to cover mx5 platforms, and solves above
performance issues.

Shawn Guo (4):
      mmc: sdhci: fix interrupt storm from card detection
      mmc: sdhci-esdhc-imx: SDHCI_CARD_PRESENT does not get cleared
      mmc: sdhci-esdhc-imx: remove "WP" from flag ESDHC_FLAG_GPIO_FOR_CD_WP
      mmc: sdhci-esdhc-imx: extend card_detect and write_protect support

Hi Arnaud,

Any chance to play with it yet?

I tried applying the patch 4 (v2) on mmc git and Sascha Hauer's for-next
branch and failed. Can you please tell me on which tree should I apply
it ?

Sascha really should not picked up the following 3 patches.  They are
nonsense when driver is not even ready for the support.  These 3
patches have conflict with my patch set.  You should be able to
apply with these 3 removed.

They're still not applying. It's failing to failing
sdhci-esdhc-imx.c. I'm currently trying t make sure I didn't miss
something but it looks like the patch is not against for-next. For
instance, look at :
http://git.pengutronix.de/?p=imx/linux-2.6.git;a=blob;f=drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc-imx.c;h=a19967d0bfc48b0ce8216de0d1a727093ee9fa03;hb=refs/heads/for-next

It's already adding a esdhc_pltfm_get_ro() function, so I fail to see
how a patch adding a function with same name can work.

My patch did not add esdhc_pltfm_get_ro() function but moved it a
little bit.  Anyway, I will go ahead to rebase the patch set on
the latest 'next' and send it as v2 shortly, since we have not heard
anything from Sascha.

-- 
Regards,
Shawn