[PATCH] mmc: failure of block read wait for long time

[Ghorai, Sukumar]

Chris and Adrian,

[..snip..]
> 
> Chris and Adrian,
> 
> [..snip..]
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
[..snip..]
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: failure of block read wait for long time
> > >
> > > On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 11:02:08AM +0530, Ghorai, Sukumar wrote:
> > > > Would you please review and merge this patch [1] (attached too)?
> > > > [1] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.mmc/2714
> > >
> > > I've been following the thread.  I believe Adrian has NACKed this
> patch,
> > > by saying "It is absolutely unacceptable to return I/O errors to the
> > > upper layers for segments that do not have errors."
> >
> > [Ghorai]
> > I think Russell also mentioned his opinion. Would you please add your
> idea
> > too?
> >
> > 1. I would prefer Adrian to explain again what this statement means, in
> > the context - data read fail and how we make it success?
> >
> > 2. if data read fail for sector(x) why we have to try for
> > sector(x+1, ..x+n)?
> >
> > 3. how to inform reader function which sector having the valid data out
> of
> > (1...n) sectors.
> >
> > 4. do we have any driver/code in Linux or any other os, which give
> inter-
> > leave data and return as success?
> >
> [Ghorai] please reply with your input on my/ Russell's suggestion?
[Ghorai] any input?
> 
> > >
> > > I think it's possible to merge patches to improve the situation (such
> > > as the idea of noticing a card disappearing earlier), but your initial
> > > patch is not the patch to do that.  You should continue to work with
> > > Adrian -- when he's happy that a patch does not break the semantics
> > > above, we can consider merging it.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > --
> > > Chris Ball   <cjb at laptop.org>   <http://printf.net/>
> > > One Laptop Per Child