Hi Andy,
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Minkyu Kang wrote:
> Dear Raffaele Recalcati,
>
> On 3 April 2011 13:39, Raffaele Recalcati wrote:
>> Hi Minkyu,
>>
>> I have sent some patches about mmc and reviewed one, can you please
>> tell me what to do mainline them?
>>
>> 11 mar :
>> [PATCH 1/3][v
Dear Raffaele Recalcati,
On 3 April 2011 13:39, Raffaele Recalcati wrote:
> Hi Minkyu,
>
> I have sent some patches about mmc and reviewed one, can you please
> tell me what to do mainline them?
>
> 11 mar :
> [PATCH 1/3][v3] mmc: checking status after commands with R1b response
> --> it has one
Hi Minkyu,
On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 3:46 AM, Minkyu Kang wrote:
> Dear Chander Kashyap,
>
> On 22 March 2011 20:40, Chander Kashyap wrote:
>> Blocksize was hardcoded to 512 bytes. But the blocksize varies
>> depeding on various mmc subsystem commands (between 8 and 512).
>> This hardcoding was re
Dear Chander Kashyap,
On 22 March 2011 20:40, Chander Kashyap wrote:
> Blocksize was hardcoded to 512 bytes. But the blocksize varies
> depeding on various mmc subsystem commands (between 8 and 512).
> This hardcoding was resulting in interrupt error during data
> transfer.
>
> It is now calculat
Blocksize was hardcoded to 512 bytes. But the blocksize varies
depeding on various mmc subsystem commands (between 8 and 512).
This hardcoding was resulting in interrupt error during data
transfer.
It is now calculated based upon the request sent by mmc subsystem.
Signed-off-by: Chander Kashyap
5 matches
Mail list logo