> -----Original Message----- > From: S, Venkatraman [mailto:svenkatr@xxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 14:17 PM > To: Zang Roy-R61911 > Cc: linux-mmc; linuxppc-dev; cbouatmailru; akpm; Xu Lei-B33228; Kumar Gala > Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] eSDHC: Fix errors when booting kernel with fsl esdhc > > On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Roy Zang <tie-fei.zang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Xu lei <B33228@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > When esdhc module was enabled in p5020, there were following errors: > > > > mmc0: Timeout waiting for hardware interrupt. > > mmc0: error -110 whilst initialising SD card > > mmc0: Unexpected interrupt 0x02000000. > > mmc0: Timeout waiting for hardware interrupt. > > mmc0: error -110 whilst initialising SD card > > mmc0: Unexpected interrupt 0x02000000. > > > > It is because ESDHC controller has different bit setting for PROCTL > > register, when kernel sets Power Control Register by method for standard > > SD Host Specification, it would overwritten FSL ESDHC PROCTL[DMAS]; > > when it set Host Control Registers[DMAS], it sets PROCTL[EMODE] and > > PROCTL[D3CD]. These operations will set bad bits for PROCTL Register > > on FSL ESDHC Controller and cause errors, so this patch will make esdhc > > driver access FSL PROCTL Register according to block guide instead of > > standard SD Host Specification. > > > > For some FSL chips, such as MPC8536/P2020, PROCTL[VOLT_SEL] and PROCTL[DMAS] > > bits are reserved and even if they are set to wrong bits there is no error. > > But considering that all FSL ESDHC Controller register map is not fully > > compliant to standard SD Host Specification, we put the patch to all of > > FSL ESDHC Controllers. > > > > Signed-off-by: Lei Xu <B33228@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Roy Zang <tie-fei.zang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Kumar Gala <galak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-core.c | 3 ++ > > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c | 62 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----- > -- > > include/linux/mmc/sdhci.h | 6 ++- > > 3 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) [snip] > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c > > index 58d5436..77174e5 100644 > > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c > > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c > > @@ -674,7 +674,7 @@ static void sdhci_set_transfer_irqs(struct sdhci_host > *host) > > static void sdhci_prepare_data(struct sdhci_host *host, struct mmc_command > *cmd) > > { > > u8 count; > > - u8 ctrl; > > + u32 ctrl; > > struct mmc_data *data = cmd->data; > > int ret; > > > > @@ -807,14 +807,28 @@ static void sdhci_prepare_data(struct sdhci_host *host, > struct mmc_command *cmd) > > * is ADMA. > > */ > > if (host->version >= SDHCI_SPEC_200) { > > - ctrl = sdhci_readb(host, SDHCI_HOST_CONTROL); > > - ctrl &= ~SDHCI_CTRL_DMA_MASK; > > - if ((host->flags & SDHCI_REQ_USE_DMA) && > > - (host->flags & SDHCI_USE_ADMA)) > > - ctrl |= SDHCI_CTRL_ADMA32; > > - else > > - ctrl |= SDHCI_CTRL_SDMA; > > - sdhci_writeb(host, ctrl, SDHCI_HOST_CONTROL); > > + if (host->quirks & SDHCI_QUIRK_QORIQ_PROCTL_WEIRD) { > > +#define ESDHCI_PROCTL_DMAS_MASK 0x00000300 > > +#define ESDHCI_PROCTL_ADMA32 0x00000200 > > +#define ESDHCI_PROCTL_SDMA 0x00000000 > > Breaks the code flow / readability. Can be moved to top of the file ? The defines are only used in the following section. Why it will break the readability? I can also see this kind of define in the file ... #define SAMPLE_COUNT 5 static int sdhci_get_ro(struct mmc_host *mmc) ... Any rule should follow? [snip] > > @@ -1162,6 +1189,17 @@ static void sdhci_set_power(struct sdhci_host *host, > unsigned short power) > > > > host->pwr = pwr; > > > > + /* Now FSL ESDHC Controller has no Bus Power bit, > > + * and PROCTL[21] bit is for voltage selection */ > > Multiline comment style needed.. Will update. please help to explain your previous comment. Thanks. Roy -- 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
