On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 04:18:22PM +0100, Balaji T K wrote: > From: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@xxxxxx> > > add generic "non-removable" binding support for omap_hsmmc > > Signed-off-by: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@xxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Balaji T K <balajitk@xxxxxx> > --- > .../devicetree/bindings/mmc/ti-omap-hsmmc.txt | 2 +- > drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c | 3 +++ > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/ti-omap-hsmmc.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/ti-omap-hsmmc.txt > index 8c8908a..3b95719 100644 > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/ti-omap-hsmmc.txt > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/ti-omap-hsmmc.txt > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ Optional properties: > ti,dual-volt: boolean, supports dual voltage cards > <supply-name>-supply: phandle to the regulator device tree node > "supply-name" examples are "vmmc", "vmmc_aux" etc > -ti,non-removable: non-removable slot (like eMMC) > +ti,non-removable: non-removable eMMC with always on vccq and configurable vcc Why this change? What do "vccq" and "vcc" correspond to? The regulators are called "vmmc" and "vmmc_aux"... Why is no mention of "non-removable" added, given that it's added to the code? Is one preferred over the other? That should be noted. > ti,needs-special-reset: Requires a special softreset sequence > ti,needs-special-hs-handling: HSMMC IP needs special setting for handling High Speed > dmas: List of DMA specifiers with the controller specific format > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c > index 6ac63df..5992048 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c > @@ -1738,6 +1738,9 @@ static struct omap_mmc_platform_data *of_get_hsmmc_pdata(struct device *dev) > pdata->slots[0].switch_pin = cd_gpio; > pdata->slots[0].gpio_wp = wp_gpio; > > + if (of_find_property(np, "non-removable", NULL)) { > + pdata->slots[0].nonremovable = true; > + } This wasn't mentioned in the binding, and it seems to have different semantics to "ti,non-removable". Why is it different? > if (of_find_property(np, "ti,non-removable", NULL)) { > pdata->slots[0].nonremovable = true; > pdata->slots[0].no_regulator_off_init = true; Cheers, Mark. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html