On 10 November 2015 at 10:43, Haibo Chen <haibo.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Here we use '|=' to set the tuning-step, but before that, we should
> clear the tuning-step, otherwise we could got the wrong setting.
>
> Signed-off-by: Haibo Chen <haibo.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc-imx.c | 7 +++++--
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc-imx.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc-imx.c
> index 1508949..64275c7 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc-imx.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc-imx.c
> @@ -76,6 +76,7 @@
> #define ESDHC_STD_TUNING_EN (1 << 24)
> /* NOTE: the minimum valid tuning start tap for mx6sl is 1 */
> #define ESDHC_TUNING_START_TAP 0x1
> +#define ESDHC_TUNING_STEP_MASK 0x00070000
> #define ESDHC_TUNING_STEP_SHIFT 16
>
> /* pinctrl state */
> @@ -489,9 +490,11 @@ static void esdhc_writew_le(struct sdhci_host *host, u16 val, int reg)
> m |= ESDHC_MIX_CTRL_FBCLK_SEL;
> tuning_ctrl = readl(host->ioaddr + ESDHC_TUNING_CTRL);
> tuning_ctrl |= ESDHC_STD_TUNING_EN | ESDHC_TUNING_START_TAP;
> - if (imx_data->boarddata.tuning_step)
> + if (imx_data->boarddata.tuning_step) {
> + tuning_ctrl &= ~ESDHC_TUNING_STEP_MASK;
> tuning_ctrl |= imx_data->boarddata.tuning_step << ESDHC_TUNING_STEP_SHIFT;
> - writel(tuning_ctrl, host->ioaddr + ESDHC_TUNING_CTRL);
> + }
> + writel(tuning_ctrl, host->ioaddr + ESDHC_TUNING_CTRL);
> } else {
> v &= ~ESDHC_MIX_CTRL_EXE_TUNE;
> }
> --
> 1.9.1
>
Looks good to me, but is there a dependency to patch 1/2 that should
prevent me from applying this one?
Kind regards
Uffe
--
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
