From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754047AbYITLHG (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Sep 2008 07:07:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751430AbYITLGz (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Sep 2008 07:06:55 -0400 Received: from server.drzeus.cx ([85.8.24.28]:50905 "EHLO smtp.drzeus.cx" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751379AbYITLGz (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Sep 2008 07:06:55 -0400 Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 13:06:52 +0200 From: Pierre Ossman To: "Matt Fleming" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] MMC: Use write timeout value as read from CSR Message-ID: <20080920130652.05f3da6d@mjolnir.drzeus.cx> In-Reply-To: <5ff4a1e50809150224o600fd9fhb29e986bdb618464@mail.gmail.com> References: <5ff4a1e50809010812i32168136qea538ba177b81446@mail.gmail.com> <5ff4a1e50809090034y3156427bpfac8a07674c3c844@mail.gmail.com> <20080909094438.6423b8ef@mjolnir.drzeus.cx> <5ff4a1e50809090059i2bcdb7ber8cae07128eea5a77@mail.gmail.com> <20080909105513.5b8ceaaf@mjolnir.drzeus.cx> <5ff4a1e50809090207o5846f5udf709eeda81653eb@mail.gmail.com> <5ff4a1e50809090242ha576dcdmf82d1e9ec2204178@mail.gmail.com> <20080914154817.3d618e67@mjolnir.drzeus.cx> <5ff4a1e50809150103v1e250e0x4192e2fe901750a6@mail.gmail.com> <20080915103821.2b618bba@mjolnir.drzeus.cx> <5ff4a1e50809150224o600fd9fhb29e986bdb618464@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.5.0cvs92 (GTK+ 2.14.0; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 10:24:22 +0100 "Matt Fleming" wrote: > > OK, I can see your point here. However, this is a completely different > change to my original patch. Would it not make more sense to queue my > original patch and then for me to write some patches to move all the > timeout info into the request structure? > It's better to get it right directly. I'd consider this a bug fix patch, so it can be applied at any time during the development cycle. > > So, what I propose is this. Could you please queue my bug fix (I can > send the two patches again) and then I will begin working on the > generic patches to fix the issues that you've raised in this thread? > How does that sound? It shouldn't take that long to write the more proper solution, so get to it and it should be possible to get in even for .27. -- -- Pierre Ossman Linux kernel, MMC maintainer http://www.kernel.org rdesktop, core developer http://www.rdesktop.org WARNING: This correspondence is being monitored by the Swedish government. Make sure your server uses encryption for SMTP traffic and consider using PGP for end-to-end encryption.