On 09/22/2010 04:12 PM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Hi Peppe,
>
>> 1) I've already a patch to add the suspend/resume in the sdhci_pltfm
>> driver. Please note this is mandatory for me.
>
> Great, improvements to the generic pltfm-driver are most welcome!
Good! I'm happy to contribute on it. I'll start soon and post the
patches asap.
>
>> Note: I'd like to look at the wake-up on card that should be nice to
>> have in the future. IIUC, it is missing in the sdhci. Please correct
>> me if I'm wrong.
>
> It is not in sdhci yet. Please make sure to send very early RFC-patches
> here, so we can see what you are aiming for.
OK!
>
>> 2) sdhci_pltfm_data has a "quirk" flag but IMO the quirk macros, that
>> currently are in linux-2.6/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.h, should be
>> moved in a separate file:
>>
>> include/linux/mmc/sdhci.h or
>> include/linux/mmc/sdhci-quirk.h or ...
>>
>> I don't know if it has been already done but I could create a patch
>> for this too. Let me know the name convention you like, eventually.
>>
>> Otherwise, in my platforms, where I need to set this flag (e.g. the
>> sdhci-stm needs: SDHCI_QUIRK_NO_ENDATTR_IN_NOPDESC), I should include
>> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.h?!? I don't like it :-(
>> Please, correct me if I've missed something.
>
> You are correct. So far, all users of the quirk-flags happened to be
> inside the host-directory. If you happen to have a controller which only
> needs quirk-flags and no custom functions (congrats! ;)), then those
> quirk-flags really need to be moved, so your platform code can find it.
>
> I'd go for sdhci.h as the name. Be sure to catch all users of the quirks
> to include your new file.
OK! I like shdci.h too ;-)
I'll pay attention to add this header file in the other drivers based on
sdhci.
>
>> 3) In the end, another hook could be added in the sdhci_pltfm_data to
>> invoke specific own functions for claiming resources etc.
>> For example, I need an extra callback to invoke the STM pad manager
>> that's used for managing clocks, PIO lines and syscfg registers.
>>
>> I'm thinking about something like this:
>>
>> struct sdhci_pltfm_data {
>> struct sdhci_ops *ops;
>> unsigned int quirks;
>> int (*init)(struct sdhci_host *host);
>> void (*exit)(struct sdhci_host *host);
>> int (*claim_resource)(struct platform_device *pdev);
>> |
>> |_ we can use another name.
>> };
>
> And init() is too late?
No it's not late but I need the dev structure from the platform_device.
We could add the "struct device dev;" in the sdhci_host structure
instead of.
In this case the sdhci_host should be moved within the new
include/linux/mmc/sdhci.h file.
Indeed, this could make sense because the drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.h will
only have the HW register configuration. Shared macros (quirks) and
structures among sdhci driver based could be moved in
include/linux/mmc/sdhci.h header.
What do you think?
Regards,
Peppe
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
