Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 25 Nov 2009 21:30:36 +0100 | From | Pierre Ossman <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] Port ricoh_mmc from driver to pci quirk. |
| |
On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 08:53:24 -0800 Philip Langdale <philipl@overt.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 16:58:41 +0200 > Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >From 5c5e6f5ab1a5a09a430f410cab4b160a5e65501c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 > > >2001 > > From: Maxim Levitsky <maximlevitsky@gmail.com> > > Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2009 16:37:46 +0200 > > Subject: [PATCH] Port ricoh_mmc from driver to pci quirk. > > This is much cleaner and correct solution > > I'm fine with the concept, but when I originally started work on > Ricoh support, Pierre specifically didn't want a pci quirk. > > Pierre wrote: > > I'd rather we didn't. The current style of quirks are bad enough, > > making them even more vendor or device specific is a bit more than I'm > > willing to accept right now (seriously, how hard can it be to follow > > the damn spec?). > > Pierre's not officially the maintainer anymore but I still respect his > opinions here. Given that a pci quirk solves this problem so simply, > I think it's justified at this point. > > Pierre, do you want to comment? >
I was talking about the quirks mechanism in sdhci, not pci quirks. :)
I have no objections to this patch.
> > I would at least suggest a printk so ensure people know this is > happening - otherwise there's no visible evidence that the system > even has an MMC controller that's been disabled. >
Agreed. There might be cases where we cause problems since we don't fully understand this hardware.
Rgds -- -- Pierre Ossman
WARNING: This correspondence is being monitored by FRA, a Swedish intelligence agency. Make sure your server uses encryption for SMTP traffic and consider using PGP for end-to-end encryption. [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |