[PATCH] mmc: sdhci-pltfm: Fix timeout on t4240's sdhci controller
Gala Kumar-B11780
B11780 at freescale.com
Fri Mar 8 03:30:14 EST 2013
On Mar 7, 2013, at 2:05 AM, Chunhe Lan wrote:
> This patch fixes timeout problems on t4240's sdhci controller:
>
> mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25!
> mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25!
> mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25!
>
> Signed-off-by: Chunhe Lan <Chunhe.Lan at freescale.com>
> ---
> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c | 1 +
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c
> index 3145a78..9db7b12 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c
> @@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ void sdhci_get_of_property(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,p2020-esdhc") ||
> of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,p1010-esdhc") ||
> + of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,t4240-esdhc") ||
> of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,mpc8536-esdhc"))
> host->quirks |= SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_TIMEOUT_VAL;
>
> --
> 1.7.6.5
>
Why does this occur? Is it a board issue? Is it a silicon issue? Is it due to some erratum? Why T4 only?
- k
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list