Re: [RFC PATCH v2 4/6] mmc: sdhci: host: add new f_sdh30
From: Vincent Yang <hidden>
Date: 2014-06-27 03:32:21
Also in:
linux-devicetree, linux-mmc
2014-06-26 19:03 GMT+08:00 Mark Rutland [off-list ref]:
On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 07:23:30AM +0100, Vincent Yang wrote:quoted
This patch adds new host controller driver for Fujitsu SDHCI controller f_sdh30. Signed-off-by: Vincent Yang <redacted> --- .../devicetree/bindings/mmc/sdhci-fujitsu.txt | 35 +++ drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig | 7 + drivers/mmc/host/Makefile | 1 + drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_f_sdh30.c | 346 +++++++++++++++++++++ drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_f_sdh30.h | 40 +++ 5 files changed, 429 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/sdhci-fujitsu.txt create mode 100644 drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_f_sdh30.c create mode 100644 drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_f_sdh30.hdiff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/sdhci-fujitsu.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/sdhci-fujitsu.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..40add438 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/sdhci-fujitsu.txt@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +* Fujitsu SDHCI controller + +This file documents differences between the core properties in mmc.txt +and the properties used by the sdhci_f_sdh30 driver. + +Required properties: +- compatible: "fujitsu,f_sdh30"Please use '-' rather than '_' in compatible strings.
Hi Mark, Yes, I'll update it to '-' in next version.
This seems to be the name of the driver. What is the precise name of the IP block?
The name of the IP block is "F_SDH30". That's why it uses "fujitsu,f_sdh30"
quoted
+- voltage-ranges : two cells are required, first cell specifies minimum + slot voltage (mV), second cell specifies maximum slot voltage (mV). + Several ranges could be specified.Describe this as a list of pairs, it's confusing otherwise. I'm not sure I follow what having multiple pairs implies.
Yes, I'll update it in next version.
quoted
+Optional properties: +- gpios: This is one optional gpio for controlling a power mux which + switches between two power supplies. 3.3V is selected when gpio is high, + and 1.8V is selected when gpio is low. This voltage is used for signal + level.Give this a more descriptive name, like power-mux-gpios. That will match up with the style of cd-gpios and wp-gpios.
Yes, I'll update it in next version.
quoted
+- clocks: Must contain an entry for each entry in clock-names. It is a + list of phandles and clock-specifier pairs. + See ../clocks/clock-bindings.txt for details. +- clock-names: Should contain the following two entries: + "sd_sd4clk" - clock primarily used for tuning process + "sd_bclk" - base clock for sdhci controller + +Example: + + sdhci1: sdio@36600000 { + compatible = "fujitsu,f_sdh30"; + reg = <0 0x36600000 0x1000>; + interrupts = <0 172 0x4>, + <0 173 0x4>; + voltage-ranges = <1800 1800 3300 3300>;Place brackets around each pair to make this clearer: voltage-ranges = <1800 1800>, <3300 3300>;
Yes, I'll update it in next version.
[...]quoted
+ if (!of_property_read_u32(pdev->dev.of_node, "vendor-hs200", + &priv->vendor_hs200)) + dev_info(dev, "Applying vendor-hs200 setting\n"); + else + priv->vendor_hs200 = 0;This wasn't in the binding document, and a grep for "vendor-hs200" in a v3.16-rc2 tree found me nothing. Please document this.
Yes, it is a setting for a vendor specific register. I'll update it in next version.
quoted
+ + if (!of_property_read_u32(pdev->dev.of_node, "bus-width", &bus_width)) { + if (bus_width == 8) { + dev_info(dev, "Applying 8 bit bus width\n"); + host->mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_8_BIT_DATA; + } + }What if bus-width is not 8, or is not present?
In both cases, it will not touch host->mmc->caps at all. Then sdhci_add_host() will handle it and set MMC_CAP_4_BIT_DATA as default: [...] /* * A controller may support 8-bit width, but the board itself * might not have the pins brought out. Boards that support * 8-bit width must set "mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_8_BIT_DATA;" in * their platform code before calling sdhci_add_host(), and we * won't assume 8-bit width for hosts without that CAP. */ if (!(host->quirks & SDHCI_QUIRK_FORCE_1_BIT_DATA)) mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_4_BIT_DATA; [...]
quoted
+ + ret = mmc_of_parse_voltage(pdev->dev.of_node, &host->ocr_mask); + if (ret) { + dev_err(dev, "%s: parse voltage error\n", __func__); + goto err_voltage; + } + + host->hw_name = DRIVER_NAME; + host->ops = &sdhci_f_sdh30_ops; + host->irq = irq; + + host->ioaddr = of_iomap(pdev->dev.of_node, 0); + if (!host->ioaddr) { + dev_err(dev, "%s: failed to remap registers\n", __func__); + ret = -ENXIO; + goto err_remap; + } + + priv->clk_sd4 = of_clk_get(pdev->dev.of_node, 0); + if (!IS_ERR(priv->clk_sd4)) { + ret = clk_prepare_enable(priv->clk_sd4); + if (ret < 0) { + dev_err(dev, "Failed to enable sd4 clock: %d\n", ret); + goto err_clk1; + } + } + priv->clk_b = of_clk_get(pdev->dev.of_node, 1); + if (!IS_ERR(priv->clk_b)) { + ret = clk_prepare_enable(priv->clk_b); + if (ret < 0) { + dev_err(dev, "Failed to enable clk_b clock: %d\n", ret); + goto err_clk2; + } + }Given you gave these names, get these by name rather than index. It's less surprising and more flexible.
Yes, I'll update them as below in next version. - priv->clk_sd4 = of_clk_get(pdev->dev.of_node, 0); + priv->clk_sd4 = clk_get(&pdev->dev, "sd_sd4clk"); - priv->clk_b = of_clk_get(pdev->dev.of_node, 1); + priv->clk_b = clk_get(&pdev->dev, "sd_bclk"); Thanks a lot for your review! Best regards, Vincent Yang
Thanks, Mark.