Re: [PATCH 1/1]mmc: set timeout for SDHCI host before sending busycmd

From: Chris Ball
Date: Thu Feb 24 2011 - 16:24:44 EST


On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 09:43:52PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> +1. A full cycle in linux-next might an idea to be on the safe side? That
> would be 2.6.40-material then. Or too slow?

I think it could be okay to merge for .39, but that's mainly because I
don't think we start getting testing with a lot of cards until patches
appear in an -rc1 -- so for something that requires broad testing, I'd
rather merge it for -rc1 with a plan to revert it if we find anything

But I don't have a strong opinion, so if anyone thinks there's a reason
to wait (for example, an existence-proof of a card that misbehaves when
configured with a max timeout value) then I'm happy to do so.


Chris Ball <cjb@xxxxxxxxxx> <>
One Laptop Per Child
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at