[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAL1qeaHfsq1xOOBMQc58uSvV4unuEWHjqVpiZrpu2bQD36LbXg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 15:44:24 -0800
From: Andrew Bresticker <abrestic@...omium.org>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@...sung.com>,
Seungwon Jeon <tgih.jun@...sung.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Alexandru Stan <amstan@...omium.org>,
Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@...omium.org>,
"open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." <linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Chris Ball <chris@...ntf.net>,
"linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] mmc: dw_mmc: Use mmc_regulator_set_vqmmc in start_signal_voltage_switch
Hi Doug,
On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 3:25 PM, Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org> wrote:
> We've introduced a new helper in the MMC core:
> mmc_regulator_set_vqmmc(). Let's use this in dw_mmc. Using this new
> helper has some advantages:
>
> 1. We get the mmc_regulator_set_vqmmc() behavior of trying to match
> VQMMC and VMMC when the signal voltage is 3.3V. This ensures max
> compatibility.
>
> 2. We get rid of a few more warnings when probing unsupported
> voltages.
>
> 3. We get rid of some non-dw_mmc specific code in dw_mmc.
>
> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
One small comment below...
> @@ -1170,24 +1168,11 @@ static int dw_mci_switch_voltage(struct mmc_host *mmc, struct mmc_ios *ios)
> */
> uhs = mci_readl(host, UHS_REG);
> if (ios->signal_voltage == MMC_SIGNAL_VOLTAGE_330) {
> - min_uv = 2700000;
> - max_uv = 3600000;
> uhs &= ~v18;
> } else {
> - min_uv = 1700000;
> - max_uv = 1950000;
> uhs |= v18;
> }
> - if (!IS_ERR(mmc->supply.vqmmc)) {
> - ret = regulator_set_voltage(mmc->supply.vqmmc, min_uv, max_uv);
> -
> - if (ret) {
> - dev_dbg(&mmc->class_dev,
> - "Regulator set error %d: %d - %d\n",
> - ret, min_uv, max_uv);
> - return ret;
> - }
> - }
> + mmc_regulator_set_vqmmc(mmc, ios);
Shouldn't we check the return value here and bail out of the voltage
switch procedure if it fails?
--
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