[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACRpkdaj6bEQTo6a5gOJQne-wKqBLvuxiOe9kE+q-nkYLOU7Pw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Sep 2023 18:43:07 +0200
From: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
To: Yann Gautier <yann.gautier@...s.st.com>
Cc: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
Christophe Kerello <christophe.kerello@...s.st.com>,
Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@...wei.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: mmci: stm32: add SDIO in-band interrupt mode
Hi Yann/Christophe,
just a quick note:
On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 2:08 PM Yann Gautier <yann.gautier@...s.st.com> wrote:
> +static void sdmmc_enable_sdio_irq(struct mmci_host *host, int enable)
> +{
> + void __iomem *base = host->base;
> + u32 mask = readl_relaxed(base + MMCIMASK0);
> +
> + if (enable)
> + writel_relaxed(mask | MCI_ST_SDIOITMASK, base + MMCIMASK0);
> + else
> + writel_relaxed(mask & ~MCI_ST_SDIOITMASK, base + MMCIMASK0);
> +}
> +
> +static void sdmmc_sdio_irq(struct mmci_host *host, u32 status)
> +{
> + if (status & MCI_ST_SDIOIT) {
> + sdmmc_enable_sdio_irq(host, 0);
> + sdio_signal_irq(host->mmc);
> + }
> +}
You need to move these to mmci and rename them since Ux500 will use
the same callbacks.
> static struct mmci_host_ops sdmmc_variant_ops = {
> .validate_data = sdmmc_idma_validate_data,
(...)
> + .enable_sdio_irq = sdmmc_enable_sdio_irq,
> + .sdio_irq = sdmmc_sdio_irq,
> };
What about dropping the per-variant callbacks and just inline
this into mmci_enable_sdio_irq()/mmci_ack_sdio_irq() since
so many variants have the same scheme? I haven't looked
at the Qualcomm variant though, maybe it is completely
different...
Yours,
Linus Walleij
Powered by blists - more mailing lists