lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Aug]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: New MMC maintainer needed
On Thu, 13 Aug 2009, Adrian Hunter wrote:

> Results in microseconds:
>
> before after
> eMMC 194145 193641
> uSD 4143 2129
>
> However, that excludes powering up. For example the pbias setting
> on omap_hsmmc for MMC1 (uSD for us) has a 100ms delay.
>
> So the difference is negligible.

I therefore tend to agree with Pierre and Andrew. This doesn't make
enough of a difference to increase the complexity and maintenance cost
of the code for such a trivial improvement.

> Although, the notion of unnecessarily sending SDIO commands
> to an uSD, and SDIO and SD commands to an eMMC, seems wrong.
> Especially when trying to debug very-hard-to-reproduce errors.

Simply commenting out the SD/SDIO or MMC probe call in the code is
very simple when you're debugging. Then if you actually come to the
conclusion that some real bugs are due to this cross probe and can prove
it then we might reconsider.

Currently, generic host drivers are sometimes used in the context of a
uSD slot, sometimes in the context of a SD/SDIO/MMC slot, sometimes with
a hardwired SDIO based chip soldered on the board, and they don't need
any special flags to distinguish between those use cases. This greatly
helps maintainability, and that should prevail over slight latency
improvements to non timing critical events such as card insertion.


Nicolas


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-08-13 19:07    [W:0.471 / U:0.252 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site