[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53178789.7020606@mm-sol.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2014 22:22:33 +0200
From: Georgi Djakov <gdjakov@...sol.com>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
CC: linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>, Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org>,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, grant.likely@...aro.org,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
Rob Landley <rob@...dley.net>, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 2/3] mmc: sdhci-msm: Initial support for Qualcomm
chipsets
On 03/05/2014 06:41 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On 4 March 2014 20:27, Georgi Djakov <gdjakov@...sol.com> wrote:
[..]
>> +
>> +struct sdhci_msm_pltfm_data {
>> + u32 caps; /* Supported UHS-I Modes */
>> + u32 caps2; /* More capabilities */
>
> Why do you need these caps, there are already a part of the mmc host.
>
Thanks! Will remove.
>> + struct regulator *vdd; /* VDD/VCC regulator */
>> + struct regulator *vdd_io; /* VDD IO regulator */
>
> Why do you need to duplicate the regulators for sdhci_msm? sdhci core
> is already taking care of regulators, I suppose you should adopt to
> that!?
>
Ok, I'll try to adopt this.
>> +};
>> +
>> +struct sdhci_msm_host {
>> + struct platform_device *pdev;
>> + void __iomem *core_mem; /* MSM SDCC mapped address */
>> + int pwr_irq; /* power irq */
>> + struct clk *clk; /* main SD/MMC bus clock */
>> + struct clk *pclk; /* SDHC peripheral bus clock */
>> + struct clk *bus_clk; /* SDHC bus voter clock */
>> + struct sdhci_msm_pltfm_data pdata;
>> + struct mmc_host *mmc;
>> + struct sdhci_pltfm_data sdhci_msm_pdata;
>> +};
>> +
[..]
>> +static int sdhci_msm_vreg_init(struct device *dev,
>> + struct sdhci_msm_pltfm_data *pdata)
>> +{
>> + pdata->vdd = devm_regulator_get(dev, "vdd-supply");
>> + if (IS_ERR(pdata->vdd))
>> + return PTR_ERR(pdata->vdd);
>> +
>> + pdata->vdd_io = devm_regulator_get(dev, "vdd-io-supply");
>> + if (IS_ERR(pdata->vdd_io))
>> + return PTR_ERR(pdata->vdd_io);
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>
> The hole regulator handling seems like it's being duplicated from the
> sdhci core. If the regulator handling from the sdhci core don't suite
> your need I guess you should extend that instead - to prevent the
> duplication of code and structs.
>
> Moreover I think it's time for sdhci core to move on to use the
> mmc_regulator_get_supply() API. Additionally it should be able to use
> mmc_regulator_set_ocr() API to change voltage. I guess that's not
> related to this patch though, but just wanted to provide you my view
> on it.
Ok, I see. Thanks for the hints!
[..]
>> + ret = sdhci_add_host(host);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Add host failed (%d)\n", ret);
>> + goto vreg_disable;
>> + }
>> +
>> + ret = clk_set_rate(msm_host->clk, host->max_clk);
>
> Don't you need to set the rate before adding the host?
>
I will just make use of the sdhci core for clock setup too. Thanks for
reviewing!
BR,
Georgi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists