On 20/03/17 10:38, Piotr Sroka wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Masahiro Yamada [mailto:yamada.masahiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] >> Sent: 17 March, 2017 6:23 PM >> Subject: Re: [v2 PATCH 3/3] mmc: sdhci-cadence: Update PHY delay configuration >> >> Hi Piotr, >> >> Sorry for my late reply. >> >> >>> >>> It looks that "input delays" and "DLL sdclk delays" should be defined in dts file because they depend on a chip and a board >> implementation. On the other hand the less dts properties the better. >>> >>> There is one more way to handle input delays. It can be achieved by PHY training. PHY training is similar to the tuning and it should be >> done when proper timing mode is selected and clock frequency is set. >>> To make it possible the sdhci_set_ios function need to be global. Then I could create sdhci_cdns_set_ios function as follows: >>> void sdhci_cdns_set_ios(struct mmc_host *mmc, struct mmc_ios *ios) { >>> . . . >>> >>> sdhci_set_ios(mmc, ios); >>> /* execute PHY training if needed */ >>> sdhci_cdns_exec_phy_training(host); >>> } >>> >>> The mmc framework configures timing and frequency separately so PHY training should be executed every time if timing or clock >> frequency is changed. I am not sure If I can change sdhci_set_ios to global function. >> >> >> I am OK with this, but I hope Adrian can advise us. There is no problem exporting sdhci_set_ios() >> >> >> >> >>> So maybe put all delays to dts file would be a better solution? What do you think? >> >> I am OK with DT approach too >> because this way seems simpler, after all. >> >> (My suggestion for data array approach was misleading, sorry.) >> > Thanks for review anyway it was useful. Now decision between DTS and data array is more clear for me. > > Regards > Piotr Sroka > -- 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
