Hi Kishon, On 30/11/18 10:10 AM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: > Hi Faiz, > > On 30/11/18 12:35 AM, Faiz Abbas wrote: >> Errata i929 in certain OMAP5/DRA7XX/AM57XX silicon revisions >> (SPRZ426D - November 2014 - Revised February 2018 [1]) mentions >> unexpected tuning pattern errors. A small failure band may be present >> in the tuning range which may be missed by the current algorithm. >> Furthermore, the failure bands vary with temperature leading to >> different optimum tuning values for different temperatures. >> >> As suggested in the related Application Report (SPRACA9B - October 2017 >> - Revised July 2018 [2]), tuning should be done in two stages. >> In stage 1, assign the optimum ratio in the maximum pass window for the >> current temperature. In stage 2, if the chosen value is close to the >> small failure band, move away from it in the appropriate direction. >> >> References: >> [1] http://www.ti.com/lit/pdf/sprz426 >> [2] http://www.ti.com/lit/pdf/SPRACA9 >> >> Signed-off-by: Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@xxxxxx> >> --- >> drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig | 2 + >> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-omap.c | 90 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- >> 2 files changed, 91 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig b/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig >> index 1b58739d9744..6d3553f06f27 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig >> @@ -969,6 +969,8 @@ config MMC_SDHCI_XENON >> config MMC_SDHCI_OMAP >> tristate "TI SDHCI Controller Support" >> depends on MMC_SDHCI_PLTFM && OF >> + select THERMAL >> + select TI_SOC_THERMAL >> help >> This selects the Secure Digital Host Controller Interface (SDHCI) >> support present in TI's DRA7 SOCs. The controller supports >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-omap.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-omap.c >> index b3cb39d0db6f..9ccce7ef3a60 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-omap.c >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-omap.c >> @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ >> #include <linux/regulator/consumer.h> >> #include <linux/pinctrl/consumer.h> >> #include <linux/sys_soc.h> >> +#include <linux/thermal.h> >> >> #include "sdhci-pltfm.h" >> >> @@ -286,14 +287,18 @@ static int sdhci_omap_execute_tuning(struct mmc_host *mmc, u32 opcode) >> struct sdhci_host *host = mmc_priv(mmc); >> struct sdhci_pltfm_host *pltfm_host = sdhci_priv(host); >> struct sdhci_omap_host *omap_host = sdhci_pltfm_priv(pltfm_host); >> + struct thermal_zone_device *thermal_dev; >> struct device *dev = omap_host->dev; >> struct mmc_ios *ios = &mmc->ios; >> u32 start_window = 0, max_window = 0; >> + bool single_point_failure = false; >> u8 cur_match, prev_match = 0; >> u32 length = 0, max_len = 0; >> u32 phase_delay = 0; >> + int temperature; >> int ret = 0; >> u32 reg; >> + int i; >> >> /* clock tuning is not needed for upto 52MHz */ >> if (ios->clock <= 52000000) >> @@ -303,6 +308,16 @@ static int sdhci_omap_execute_tuning(struct mmc_host *mmc, u32 opcode) >> if (ios->timing == MMC_TIMING_UHS_SDR50 && !(reg & CAPA2_TSDR50)) >> return 0; >> >> + thermal_dev = thermal_zone_get_zone_by_name("cpu_thermal"); >> + if (IS_ERR(thermal_dev)) { >> + dev_err(dev, "Unable to get thermal zone for tuning\n"); >> + return PTR_ERR(thermal_dev); >> + } > > Can't we get thermal zone once during probe? > Tuning is also (ideally) supposed to happen only once per enumeration. Also it doesn't make sense to get a thermal zone for lower speed systems that won't do tuning. Thanks, Faiz
