Hi, On Wed, Mar 24, 2021 at 8:59 PM Veerabhadrarao Badiganti <vbadigan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> + clocks = <&gcc GCC_SDCC1_APPS_CLK>, > >> + <&gcc GCC_SDCC1_AHB_CLK>, > >> + <&rpmhcc RPMH_CXO_CLK>; > >> + clock-names = "core", "iface", "xo"; > > I'm curious: why is the "xo" clock needed here but not for sc7180? > Actually its needed even for sc7180. We are making use of this clock in > msm_init_cm_dll() > The default PoR value is also same as calculated value for > HS200/HS400/SDR104 modes. > But just not to rely on default register values we need this entry. Can you post a patch for sc7180? > >> + bus-width = <4>; > >> + > >> + no-mmc; > >> + no-sdio; > > Similar question to above: why exactly would mmc not work? Are you > > saying that if someone hooked this up to a full sized SD card slot and > > placed an MMC card into the slot that it wouldn't work? Similar > > question about SDIO. If someone placed an external SDIO card into your > > slot, would it not work? > > > As mentioned above, its just to optimize SDcard scan time a little. OK. ...but while the eMMC one can make sense since the eMMC is soldered down (but in the board dts file, not in the SoC dtsi file) I think you should just remove these for SD card because: 1. Even if only a uSD slot is exposed it's still _possible_ for someone to insert a card that uses MMC or SDIO signaling. If nothing else I have a (probably non-compliant) adapter that plugs into a uSD slot and provides a full sided SD slot. I could plug an MMC card or SDIO card in. 2. Presumably the SD card scan time optimization is tiny. -Doug
