On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>
>> I'm somewhat puzzled to what benefit 52221610d brings after bringing
>> back the write of BIT(0). Is it just that we don't hit the BUG() on
>> non-standard voltages?
>
> It is to all
On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 2:31 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On 5 January 2015 at 20:52, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>> [..]
Non-the-less, feel free to propose a patch and I will give it
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> [..]
>>> Non-the-less, feel free to propose a patch and I will give it a test.
>>
>> Lets start with the simplest change firs
On 5 January 2015 at 20:52, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> [..]
>>> Non-the-less, feel free to propose a patch and I will give it a test.
>>
>> Lets start with the simplest change first. P
On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
[..]
>> Non-the-less, feel free to propose a patch and I will give it a test.
>
> Lets start with the simplest change first. Please give this a try and
> let me know what you think.
>
>
On Wed, Dec 17, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> I'm somewhat puzzled to what benefit 52221610d brings after bringing
> back the write of BIT(0). Is it just that we don't hit the BUG() on
> non-standard voltages?
It is to allow the use of external regulators that are capable of
supplyi
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 10:20 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>
>> We are routing the regulators straight to vdd of the memory and should
>> hence use vmmc to specify this. However unless I actually program 0x29
>> in the Qualcomm sdhci block I get
On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 10:18 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> We are routing the regulators straight to vdd of the memory and should
> hence use vmmc to specify this. However unless I actually program 0x29
> in the Qualcomm sdhci block I get no responses from the card.
>
> Which I believe is correct
On 12/14/2014 09:48 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 11:22 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
...
Or simply; what is vmmc (in the code) supposed to represent?
Hi Bjorn,
VMMC is the supply that delivers power out to the SD card itself (aka VDD).
It is not the internal power rail/power
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 8:48 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 11:22 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> [..]
>>> Or simply; what is vmmc (in the code) supposed to represent?
>>
>> Hi Bjorn,
>>
>> VMMC is the supply that delivers
On Sun, Dec 14, 2014 at 8:48 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 11:22 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
[..]
>> Or simply; what is vmmc (in the code) supposed to represent?
>
> Hi Bjorn,
>
> VMMC is the supply that delivers power out to the SD card itself (aka VDD).
>
> It is not the intern
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 11:22 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 7:31 AM, Tim Kryger wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Alexandre Courbot
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Tim, thanks for your reply!
>>>
>>> On 11/04/2014 02:28 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 7:05
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 7:31 AM, Tim Kryger wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>> Hi Tim, thanks for your reply!
>>
>> On 11/04/2014 02:28 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Alexandre Courbot
[..]
After bisecting I tracked commit 5222
On 11/06/2014 12:27 AM, Tim Kryger wrote:
On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 12:10 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
On 11/05/2014 12:31 AM, Tim Kryger wrote:
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Alexandre Courbot
wrote:
Hi Tim, thanks for your reply!
On 11/04/2014 02:28 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
On Mon, Nov 3,
On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 12:10 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> On 11/05/2014 12:31 AM, Tim Kryger wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Alexandre Courbot
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Tim, thanks for your reply!
>>>
>>> On 11/04/2014 02:28 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 7:
On 11/05/2014 12:31 AM, Tim Kryger wrote:
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
Hi Tim, thanks for your reply!
On 11/04/2014 02:28 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Alexandre Courbot
wrote:
Hi guys,
On the NVIDIA shield (tegra114-roth) platform, I h
On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 1:00 AM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> Hi Tim, thanks for your reply!
>
> On 11/04/2014 02:28 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Alexandre Courbot
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi guys,
>>>
>>> On the NVIDIA shield (tegra114-roth) platform, I have noticed that MMC
Hi Tim, thanks for your reply!
On 11/04/2014 02:28 PM, Tim Kryger wrote:
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
Hi guys,
On the NVIDIA shield (tegra114-roth) platform, I have noticed that MMC
stopped working completely on recent kernels. MMC devices will not show up
and the
On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> Hi guys,
>
> On the NVIDIA shield (tegra114-roth) platform, I have noticed that MMC
> stopped working completely on recent kernels. MMC devices will not show up
> and the message "mmc1: Controller never released inhibit bit(s)." shows up
>
Hi guys,
On the NVIDIA shield (tegra114-roth) platform, I have noticed that MMC
stopped working completely on recent kernels. MMC devices will not show
up and the message "mmc1: Controller never released inhibit bit(s)."
shows up repeatedly in the console.
After bisecting I tracked commit
5
20 matches
Mail list logo
