Re: [RFC 4/4] Atmel MCI: Driver for Atmel on-chip MMC controllers

On Saturday 24 November 2007, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> > 
> > Why is this needed and is it perhaps something that can be moved to
> > the MMC core?
> 
> We used to have lots of problems with overruns and underruns and those
> parameters were useful to limit the transfer rate. Now that the RDPROOF
> and WRPROOF bits seem to have taken care of these problems for good, I
> guess we can remove this parameter.

Not all silicon *has* those bits though, right?  Like at91rm9200.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [RFC 4/4] Atmel MCI: Driver for Atmel on-chip MMC controllers
    • From: Haavard Skinnemoen <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [RFC 0/4] dmaengine: Slave DMA interface and example users
    • From: Haavard Skinnemoen <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC 4/4] Atmel MCI: Driver for Atmel on-chip MMC controllers
    • From: Pierre Ossman <[email protected]>
  • Re: [RFC 4/4] Atmel MCI: Driver for Atmel on-chip MMC controllers
    • From: Haavard Skinnemoen <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: "buggy cmd640" message followed by soft lockup
• Next by Date: Re: Laptop keyboard unusable when ACPI is active
• Previous by thread: Re: [RFC 4/4] Atmel MCI: Driver for Atmel on-chip MMC controllers
• Next by thread: Re: [RFC 4/4] Atmel MCI: Driver for Atmel on-chip MMC controllers
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]