On 26/07/13 10:04, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Ryan, > > On Friday 26 July 2013 09:45:26 Ryan Mallon wrote: >> On 26/07/13 09:26, Laurent Pinchart wrote: >>> Add support for passing CD/RO GPIO numbers directly to the mmc_spi >>> driver instead of relying solely on board code callbacks to retrieve the >>> CD/RO signals values. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart >>> <laurent.pinchart+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>> --- >>> >>> drivers/mmc/host/mmc_spi.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++--------- >>> drivers/mmc/host/of_mmc_spi.c | 46 ++++++++++---------------------------- >>> include/linux/spi/mmc_spi.h | 11 +++++++++++ >>> 3 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 43 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmc_spi.c b/drivers/mmc/host/mmc_spi.c >>> index 74145d1..4e83908 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/mmc_spi.c >>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/mmc_spi.c >>> @@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ >>> >>> #include <linux/mmc/host.h> >>> #include <linux/mmc/mmc.h> /* for R1_SPI_* bit values */ >>> +#include <linux/mmc/slot-gpio.h> >>> #include <linux/spi/spi.h> >>> #include <linux/spi/mmc_spi.h> >>> >>> @@ -1278,11 +1279,8 @@ static int mmc_spi_get_ro(struct mmc_host *mmc) >>> if (host->pdata && host->pdata->get_ro) >>> return !!host->pdata->get_ro(mmc->parent); >>> >>> - /* >>> - * Board doesn't support read only detection; let the mmc core >>> - * decide what to do. >>> - */ >>> - return -ENOSYS; >>> + else >>> + return mmc_gpio_get_ro(mmc); >> >> Why not just have the board file assign mmc_gpio_get_ro as >> host->pdata->get_ro? This would eliminate the need for the >> MMC_SPI_USE_RO_GPIO flag. > > Because the idea is to get rid of board callbacks and rely on proper kernel > abstraction layers such as the GPIO subsystem. This will be especially > important when adding device tree support to the mmc_spi driver. > >> Also, if host->pdata->get_ro is not set then this will assume >> mmc_gpio_get_ro is valid, even if MMC_SPI_USE_RO_GPIO is not set. I'm >> guessing it will end up returning -ENOSYS, but they way the code reads is >> that if the host doesn't have get_ro function set, then it is must be a >> gpio. > > mmc_gpio_get_ro() will indeed return -ENOSYS when the MMC_SPI_USE_RO_GPIO flag > isn't set, as the mmc_spi driver will not call mmc_gpio_request_ro() in that > case. > > This patch hides the -ENOSYS value from the mmc_spi_get_ro() and > mmc_spi_get_cd() functions, perhaps making them slightly confusing, but patch > 06/12 then gets rid of those functions, so I don't think it's a bit issue. Ah, I didn't read far enough along in the patch series :-). So all mmc spi ro/cd controls are now assumed to be gpios? ~Ryan -- 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
