Hi Adrian,
On 10/10/2016 6:57 PM, Adrian Hunter wrote:
On 05/10/16 17:40, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
The newer msm sdhci's cores use a different DLL hardware for HS400.
Update the configuration and calibration of the newer DLL block.
The HS400 DLL block used previously is CDC LP 533 and requires
programming multiple registers and waiting for configuration to
complete and then enable it. It has about 18 register writes and
two register reads.
The newer HS400 DLL block is SDC4 DLL and requires two register
writes for configuration and one register read to confirm that it
is initialized. There is an additional register write to enable
the power save mode for SDC4 DLL block.
Signed-off-by: Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Krishna Konda <kkonda@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c | 141 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
1 file changed, 127 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
index dbf80a9c..ddc8dc9 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@
#include <linux/delay.h>
#include <linux/mmc/mmc.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
+#include <linux/iopoll.h>
#include "sdhci-pltfm.h"
@@ -50,6 +51,7 @@
#define INT_MASK 0xf
#define MAX_PHASES 16
#define CORE_DLL_LOCK BIT(7)
+#define CORE_DDR_DLL_LOCK BIT(11)
#define CORE_DLL_EN BIT(16)
#define CORE_CDR_EN BIT(17)
#define CORE_CK_OUT_EN BIT(18)
@@ -61,6 +63,7 @@
#define CORE_DLL_STATUS 0x108
#define CORE_DLL_CONFIG_2 0x1b4
+#define CORE_DDR_CAL_EN BIT(0)
#define CORE_FLL_CYCLE_CNT BIT(18)
#define CORE_DLL_CLOCK_DISABLE BIT(21)
@@ -99,6 +102,11 @@
#define CORE_DDR_200_CFG 0x184
#define CORE_CDC_T4_DLY_SEL BIT(0)
#define CORE_START_CDC_TRAFFIC BIT(6)
+#define CORE_VENDOR_SPEC3 0x1b0
+#define CORE_PWRSAVE_DLL BIT(3)
+
+#define CORE_DDR_CONFIG 0x1b8
+#define DDR_CONFIG_POR_VAL 0x80040853
#define CORE_VENDOR_SPEC_CAPABILITIES0 0x11c
@@ -127,6 +135,7 @@ struct sdhci_msm_host {
bool tuning_done;
bool calibration_done;
u8 saved_tuning_phase;
+ bool use_cdclp533;
};
/* Platform specific tuning */
@@ -460,7 +469,7 @@ static int sdhci_msm_cdclp533_calibration(struct sdhci_host *host)
{
struct sdhci_pltfm_host *pltfm_host = sdhci_priv(host);
struct sdhci_msm_host *msm_host = sdhci_pltfm_priv(pltfm_host);
- u32 wait_cnt, config;
+ u32 config, calib_done;
int ret;
pr_debug("%s: Enter %s\n", mmc_hostname(host->mmc), __func__);
@@ -552,18 +561,13 @@ static int sdhci_msm_cdclp533_calibration(struct sdhci_host *host)
wmb(); /* drain writebuffer */
/* Poll on CALIBRATION_DONE field in CORE_CSR_CDC_STATUS0 to be 1 */
- wait_cnt = 50;
- while (!(readl_relaxed(host->ioaddr + CORE_CSR_CDC_STATUS0)
- & CORE_CALIBRATION_DONE)) {
- /* max. wait for 50us sec for CALIBRATION_DONE bit to be set */
- if (--wait_cnt == 0) {
- pr_err("%s: %s: CDC Calibration was not completed\n",
+ ret = readl_poll_timeout(host->ioaddr + CORE_CSR_CDC_STATUS0,
This code was added in a previous patch, so it would make more sense to make
it use readl_poll_timeout in the first place. Was there a reason to use
readl_poll_timeout instead of readl_relaxed_poll_timeout()?
Sure will make the change in previous patch.
Thanks for pointing out about readl_relaxed_poll_timeout.
I think I only missed it, will check once again.
+ calib_done, (calib_done & CORE_CALIBRATION_DONE), 1, 50);
+
+ if (ret == -ETIMEDOUT) {
+ pr_err("%s: %s: CDC Calibration was not completed\n",
mmc_hostname(host->mmc), __func__);
- ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
- goto out;
- }
- /* wait for 1us before polling again */
- udelay(1);
+ goto out;
}
/* Verify CDC_ERROR_CODE field in CORE_CSR_CDC_STATUS0 is 0 */
@@ -586,6 +590,86 @@ out:
return ret;
}
+static int sdhci_msm_cm_dll_sdc4_calibration(struct sdhci_host *host)
+{
+ u32 dll_status, config;
+ int ret;
+
+ pr_debug("%s: Enter %s\n", mmc_hostname(host->mmc), __func__);
+
+ /*
+ * Currently the CORE_DDR_CONFIG register defaults to desired
+ * configuration on reset. Currently reprogramming the power on
+ * reset (POR) value in case it might have been modified by
+ * bootloaders. In the future, if this changes, then the desired
+ * values will need to be programmed appropriately.
+ */
+ writel_relaxed(DDR_CONFIG_POR_VAL, host->ioaddr + CORE_DDR_CONFIG);
+
+ /* Write 1 to DDR_CAL_EN field in CORE_DLL_CONFIG_2 */
+ config = readl_relaxed(host->ioaddr + CORE_DLL_CONFIG_2);
+ config |= CORE_DDR_CAL_EN;
+ writel_relaxed(config, host->ioaddr + CORE_DLL_CONFIG_2);
+
+ /* Poll on DDR_DLL_LOCK bit in CORE_DLL_STATUS to be set */
+ ret = readl_poll_timeout(host->ioaddr + CORE_DLL_STATUS,
Was there a reason to use readl_poll_timeout instead of
readl_relaxed_poll_timeout()?
Sure will check it.
+ dll_status, (dll_status & CORE_DDR_DLL_LOCK), 10, 1000);
+
+ if (ret == -ETIMEDOUT) {
+ pr_err("%s: %s: CM_DLL_SDC4 Calibration was not completed\n",
+ mmc_hostname(host->mmc), __func__);
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ /* set CORE_PWRSAVE_DLL bit in CORE_VENDOR_SPEC3 */
+ config = readl_relaxed(host->ioaddr + CORE_VENDOR_SPEC3);
+ config |= CORE_PWRSAVE_DLL;
+ writel_relaxed(config, host->ioaddr + CORE_VENDOR_SPEC3);
+ wmb(); /* drain writebuffer */
+out:
+ pr_debug("%s: Exit %s, ret:%d\n", mmc_hostname(host->mmc),
+ __func__, ret);
+ return ret;
+}
+
+static int sdhci_msm_hs400_dll_calibration(struct sdhci_host *host)
+{
+ struct sdhci_pltfm_host *pltfm_host = sdhci_priv(host);
+ struct sdhci_msm_host *msm_host = sdhci_pltfm_priv(pltfm_host);
+ int ret;
+ u32 config;
+
+ pr_debug("%s: Enter %s\n", mmc_hostname(host->mmc), __func__);
+
+ /*
+ * Retuning in HS400 (DDR mode) will fail, just reset the
+ * tuning block and restore the saved tuning phase.
+ */
+ ret = msm_init_cm_dll(host);
+ if (ret)
+ goto out;
+
+ /* Set the selected phase in delay line hw block */
+ ret = msm_config_cm_dll_phase(host, msm_host->saved_tuning_phase);
+ if (ret)
+ goto out;
+
+ /* Write 1 to CMD_DAT_TRACK_SEL field in DLL_CONFIG */
+ config = readl_relaxed(host->ioaddr + CORE_DLL_CONFIG);
+ config |= CORE_CMD_DAT_TRACK_SEL;
+ writel_relaxed(config, host->ioaddr + CORE_DLL_CONFIG);
+ if (msm_host->use_cdclp533)
+ /* Calibrate CDCLP533 DLL HW */
+ ret = sdhci_msm_cdclp533_calibration(host);
sdhci_msm_cdclp533_calibration() does some of the steps above all over
again. Is that intended?
Yes, this was as per the HW sequence.
+ else
+ /* Calibrate CM_DLL_SDC4 HW */
+ ret = sdhci_msm_cm_dll_sdc4_calibration(host);
+out:
+ pr_debug("%s: Exit %s, ret:%d\n", mmc_hostname(host->mmc),
+ __func__, ret);
+ return ret;
+}
+
static int sdhci_msm_execute_tuning(struct sdhci_host *host, u32 opcode)
{
int tuning_seq_cnt = 3;
@@ -737,7 +821,7 @@ static void sdhci_msm_set_uhs_signaling(struct sdhci_host *host,
if (host->clock > CORE_FREQ_100MHZ &&
msm_host->tuning_done && !msm_host->calibration_done &&
(mmc->ios.timing == MMC_TIMING_MMC_HS400))
- if (!sdhci_msm_cdclp533_calibration(host))
+ if (!sdhci_msm_hs400_dll_calibration(host))
msm_host->calibration_done = true;
spin_lock_irq(&host->lock);
@@ -883,7 +967,7 @@ static void sdhci_msm_set_clock(struct sdhci_host *host, unsigned int clock)
struct sdhci_pltfm_host *pltfm_host = sdhci_priv(host);
struct sdhci_msm_host *msm_host = sdhci_pltfm_priv(pltfm_host);
struct mmc_ios curr_ios = host->mmc->ios;
- u32 msm_clock, config;
+ u32 msm_clock, config, dll_lock;
int rc;
if (!clock)
@@ -942,7 +1026,29 @@ static void sdhci_msm_set_clock(struct sdhci_host *host, unsigned int clock)
config |= CORE_HC_SELECT_IN_EN;
writel_relaxed(config, host->ioaddr + CORE_VENDOR_SPEC);
}
+ if (!msm_host->clk_rate && !msm_host->use_cdclp533) {
+ /*
+ * Poll on DLL_LOCK and DDR_DLL_LOCK bits in
+ * CORE_DLL_STATUS to be set. This should get set
+ * with in 15 us at 200 MHz.
'with in' -> 'within'
Done.
+ */
+ rc = readl_poll_timeout(host->ioaddr + CORE_DLL_STATUS,
Was there a reason to use readl_poll_timeout instead of
readl_relaxed_poll_timeout()?
Sure will check it.
+ dll_lock, (dll_lock & (CORE_DLL_LOCK |
+ CORE_DDR_DLL_LOCK)), 10, 1000);
The comment says 'DLL_LOCK and DDR_DLL_LOCK' but the logic looks 'DLL_LOCK
or DDR_DLL_LOCK'
Ok, I will fix the comment.
will double confirm the HW spec as well.
+ if (rc == -ETIMEDOUT)
+ pr_err("%s: Unable to get DLL_LOCK/DDR_DLL_LOCK, dll_status: 0x%08x\n",
+ mmc_hostname(host->mmc), dll_lock);
+ }
} else {
+ if (!msm_host->use_cdclp533) {
+ /* set CORE_PWRSAVE_DLL bit in CORE_VENDOR_SPEC3 */
+ config = readl_relaxed(host->ioaddr +
+ CORE_VENDOR_SPEC3);
+ config &= ~CORE_PWRSAVE_DLL;
+ writel_relaxed(config, host->ioaddr +
+ CORE_VENDOR_SPEC3);
+ }
+
/* Select the default clock (free running MCLK) */
config = readl_relaxed(host->ioaddr + CORE_VENDOR_SPEC);
config &= ~CORE_HC_MCLK_SEL_MASK;
@@ -1172,6 +1278,13 @@ static int sdhci_msm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
msm_host->use_14lpp_dll_reset = true;
/*
+ * SDCC 5 controller with major version 1, minor version 0x34 and later
+ * with HS 400 mode support will use CM DLL instead of CDC LP 533 DLL.
+ */
+ if ((core_major == 1) && (core_minor < 0x34))
+ msm_host->use_cdclp533 = true;
+
+ /*
* Support for some capabilities is not advertised by newer
* controller versions and must be explicitly enabled.
*/
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
