2014-06-27 18:12 GMT+08:00 Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>: > On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 04:32:21AM +0100, Vincent Yang wrote: >> 2014-06-26 19:03 GMT+08:00 Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>: >> > On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 07:23:30AM +0100, Vincent Yang wrote: >> >> This patch adds new host controller driver for >> >> Fujitsu SDHCI controller f_sdh30. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Vincent Yang <Vincent.Yang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> --- >> >> .../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.h >> >> >> >> diff --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" > > Hmm. I'd still be tempted to use "fujitsu,f-sdh30". Hi Mark, Sure, I'll update it to "fujitsu,f-sdh30" in next version. > >> > >> > [...] >> > >> >> + 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. > > It would be nice to know exactly what this is. We usually shy clear of > placing register values in dt. I can wait until the next posting if > you're goin to document that. I'm thinking about removing this register value in dt. I'll update it in next version. > >> >> + 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; > > Ok, but does it make sense for a dts to have: > > bus-width = <1>; > > If so, we should presumably do something. > > If not, we should at least print a warning that the dtb doesn't make > sense. I'll print a warning for invalid values in next version. Thanks a lot for your review! Best regards, Vincent Yang > > 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