On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 01:03:43PM +0800, Dong Aisheng wrote:

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Shawn Guo [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 11:35:17AM +0800, Dong Aisheng wrote:

quoted

This actually is the register value, not the max timeout counter value.
Then you may want define the API as:
unsigned int    (*get_max_timeout_val)(struct sdhci_host *host);

Yes, something like that.

quoted

But i don't think it's necessary to do the max timeout setting in two steps.
First, deinfe a API to get the max timeout counter val,
Second, write this val into register.
Why not simply implement .set_timeout and handle the details in
platform specific
host driver respectively?

Well, that's how sdhci host driver is structured.  Doing so leaves the
least details to platform driver, and calling sdhci_writeb() to access
SDHCI_TIMEOUT_CONTROL in sdhci-esdhc-imx seems a layer violation to me.

The current sdhci-esdhci-imx already does something like that.
You can search SDHCI_* in the code.
It just reuses the register offset definition in sdhci,
It's not the layer violation.

I do not understand why we have to do this SDHCI_TIMEOUT_CONTROL setup
in our sdhci-esdhc-imx driver, when sdhci driver is already structured
to do it in its way.  All we need is a hook to give the correct
max_timeout_val.

Shawn