One Thousand Gnomes gnomes at lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk
Thu Jan 28 07:54:44 PST 2016

On Thu, 28 Jan 2016 16:03:34 +0100
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson at linaro.org> wrote:

> [...]
> >  
> >> > of it's bad code structure. Therefore I have taken a quite simple
> >> > approach by rejecting new callbacks and quirks, in a way to prevent it
> >> > from being worse.  
> >
> > Which merely guarantees that the problem gets worse, because everyone
> > just puts their SD patches into Android trees instead and then when that
> > device is needed in Linux proper the crap hits the fan or people write
> > uglier and more hideous hacks buried elsewhere.
> >
> > Eventually something gives way, and it will always be the maintainer,
> > because everyone needs to get their devices supported. You can guide new
> > callbacks in constructive ways but not stop them.  
> Well, I did stop them at least temporary.

I always describe it as "putting a cork in the sewerage pipe". It might
stop it for a bit but

a) you don't want to be too close when it breaks
b) it's not good what happens further up the pipe

> Although, I have been telling people *why* and also trying to give
> some guidelines of how I wanted this to move forward.
> I understand some become frustrated from getting patches nacked like this.
> In principle I have requested them to help evolving sdhci in a new and
> better direction, instead of adding yet more hacks. That of course
> requires a deeper understanding of both the mmc core, but also sdhci
> in general.
> [...]
> Also, thanks for sharing your experience in this field. You made some
> good points!

I'm happy to help try and sort the code out. Not maintain it - my
knowledge of the intricacies of SDHCI is not good enough.


More information about the linux-rpi-kernel mailing list