Date: Fri, 29 May 2020 16:22:40 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 204521] [new driver] [request] Port rtsx from OpenBSD to FreeBSD Message-ID: <bug-204521-227-vUMLFoB1Hr@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-204521-227@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-204521-227@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=204521 --- Comment #140 from hlh@restart.be --- (In reply to Jesper Schmitz Mouridsen from comment #139) I forget to put the right message when switching back the content of the power_xx(). So it is just in power_up and not power_on. I found that rtsx_mmcbr_update_ios() never encounter a power_on. You was right when you switch power_up and power_on because so you do a power_on when a power_up was requested. In the github I push now, I change the switch in rtsx_mmcbr_update_ios() switch (ios->power_mode) { case power_off: if (sc->rtsx_power_mode != power_off) { rtsx_bus_power_off(sc); sc->rtsx_power_mode = power_off; } break; case power_up: // if (sc->rtsx_power_mode != power_up) { // rtsx_bus_power_up(sc); // sc->rtsx_power_mode = power_up; // } // break; case power_on: if (sc->rtsx_power_mode != power_on) { rtsx_bus_power_on(sc); sc->rtsx_power_mode = power_on; } break; }; To be more coherent (if it is possible ;-) Can you please test with this last update thanks -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-204521-227-vUMLFoB1Hr>