Hi Guennadi,
You have my ack on this then!
Acked-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx>
Kind regards
Ulf Hansson
On 06/13/2012 03:44 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
On Wed, 13 Jun 2012, Ulf Hansson wrote:
Hi Guennadi,
On 06/13/2012 02:57 PM, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
Add a function to get regulators, supplying card's Vdd and Vccq on a
specific host. If a Vdd supplying regulator is found, the function checks,
whether a valid OCR mask can be obtained from it. The Vccq regulator is
optional. A failure to get it is not fatal.
Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski<g.liakhovetski@xxxxxx>
---
v5: put struct mmc_supply inside struct mmc_host, thanks for all comments
drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
include/linux/mmc/host.h | 16 ++++++++++++++--
2 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
index 0b6141d..4aa8658 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
@@ -1013,6 +1013,30 @@ int mmc_regulator_set_ocr(struct mmc_host *mmc,
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(mmc_regulator_set_ocr);
+int mmc_regulator_get_supply(struct mmc_host *mmc)
+{
+ struct device *dev = mmc_dev(mmc);
+ struct regulator *supply;
+ int ret;
+
+ supply = devm_regulator_get(dev, "vmmc");
+
+ if (IS_ERR(supply))
+ return PTR_ERR(supply);
+
+ mmc->supply.vmmc = supply;
+ mmc->supply.vqmmc = devm_regulator_get(dev, "vqmmc");
+
+ ret = mmc_regulator_get_ocrmask(supply);
+ if (ret> 0)
+ mmc->ocr_avail = ret;
+ else
+ dev_warn(mmc_dev(mmc), "Failed getting OCR mask: %d\n", ret);
+
+ return 0;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mmc_regulator_get_supply);
+
#endif /* CONFIG_REGULATOR */
/*
diff --git a/include/linux/mmc/host.h b/include/linux/mmc/host.h
index 0707d22..9deb725 100644
--- a/include/linux/mmc/host.h
+++ b/include/linux/mmc/host.h
@@ -155,6 +155,13 @@ struct mmc_hotplug {
void *handler_priv;
};
+struct regulator;
Sorry for not spotting this before. Can we not remove this and instead do an
include in the top of this file like:
#include<linux/regulator/consumer.h>
No, forward-declaring a single struct is preferred over including a
complete header.
Thanks
Guennadi
+
+struct mmc_supply {
+ struct regulator *vmmc; /* Card power supply */
+ struct regulator *vqmmc; /* Optional Vccq supply */
+};
Do we really need a new separate struct for this? I am in favor of having the
regulators directly in the mmc_host, just for simplicity.
+
struct mmc_host {
struct device *parent;
struct device class_dev;
@@ -309,6 +316,7 @@ struct mmc_host {
#ifdef CONFIG_REGULATOR
bool regulator_enabled; /* regulator state */
#endif
+ struct mmc_supply supply;
struct dentry *debugfs_root;
@@ -357,13 +365,12 @@ static inline void mmc_signal_sdio_irq(struct mmc_host
*host)
wake_up_process(host->sdio_irq_thread);
}
-struct regulator;
-
#ifdef CONFIG_REGULATOR
int mmc_regulator_get_ocrmask(struct regulator *supply);
int mmc_regulator_set_ocr(struct mmc_host *mmc,
struct regulator *supply,
unsigned short vdd_bit);
+int mmc_regulator_get_supply(struct mmc_host *mmc);
#else
static inline int mmc_regulator_get_ocrmask(struct regulator *supply)
{
@@ -376,6 +383,11 @@ static inline int mmc_regulator_set_ocr(struct mmc_host
*mmc,
{
return 0;
}
+
+static inline int mmc_regulator_get_supply(struct mmc_host *mmc)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
#endif
int mmc_card_awake(struct mmc_host *host);
Sorry being a bit picky, I am that mode today :-)
Kind regards
Ulf Hansson
---
Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D.
Freelance Open-Source Software Developer
http://www.open-technology.de/
--
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
