On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 15:29:44 -0700
Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jul 2009 14:52:09 +0100
> Matt Fleming <matt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 09:50:03AM +0300, Ohad Ben-Cohen wrote:
> > > Hi Andrew,
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 23, 2009 at 9:22 AM, Andrew
> > > Morton<akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > I actually already have a little pile of MMC things queued:
> > >
> > > Please also consider queuing up the attached patch as well.
> > >
> > > The patch is removing the current SDIO cards 1.8V limit, which is
> > > needed for embedded
> > > SDIO devices like TI 127x WLAN devices (with 1.8V MMC controllers
> > > like we have on the ZOOM2 boards for example).
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > > Ohad.
> >
> > > From f9ba45b537dd12fc09443ee29c48860665f8ac82 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> > > 2001 From: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 09:21:41 +0300
> > > Subject: [PATCH] sdio: do not ignore MMC_VDD_165_195
> > >
> > > This is needed for 1.8V embedded SDIO devices and supporting host
> > > controllers (e.g. TI 127x and ZOOM2 boards)
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > drivers/mmc/core/sdio.c | 7 -------
> > > 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/sdio.c b/drivers/mmc/core/sdio.c
> > > index fb99ccf..6f221dc 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/mmc/core/sdio.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/sdio.c
> > > @@ -275,13 +275,6 @@ int mmc_attach_sdio(struct mmc_host *host,
> > > u32 ocr) ocr &= ~0x7F;
> > > }
> > >
> > > - if (ocr & MMC_VDD_165_195) {
> > > - printk(KERN_WARNING "%s: SDIO card claims to
> > > support the "
> > > - "incompletely defined 'low voltage
> > > range'. This "
> > > - "will be ignored.\n", mmc_hostname(host));
> > > - ocr &= ~MMC_VDD_165_195;
> > > - }
> > > -
> > > host->ocr = mmc_select_voltage(host, ocr);
> > >
> > > /*
> > > --
> > > 1.5.4.3
> > >
> >
> > Looks OK to me, I'm unaware of a reason to not allow a card to use
> > MMC_VDD_165_195 if that's what it wants.
> >
>
> Yes, that code was there from day #1, via Pierre's original commit.
> There is no indication in either the code comments or the changelog
> why it was done this way.
>
> Other ways of finding out why this code is there include:
>
> a) search the mailing list for review discussion. I can't find it
> in my lkml archive.
>
> b) ask Pierre :)
Both the (Simplified) SD and SDIO specifications do not formally define
the 'low voltage' range in the way the MMC spec does. ie: You won't
find anything in the SD specs that even tell you what the range is -
it just says that it exists.
So we (I wrote the first incarnation of this check for normal SD cards)
decided to bail if a card requested the low voltage range. Now, if
there's actually hardware out there that is SD/SDIO and operates at
1.8V, we should probably do something more appropriate. :-)
It's obviously an easy change but I'd feel a lot more comfortable if
someone can point us to a document that states that the SD/SDIO low
voltage range is defined to match the MMC one. Maybe one of the NDA
docs actually states this.
Andrew - I'm also willing to be cc'ed on MMC changes and I'll respond
to the best of my (limited) abilities.
--phil
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-embedded" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
