On 4/16/20 2:07 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On Thu, 16 Apr 2020 at 12:29, Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On 4/15/20 10:40 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>> On Wed, 1 Apr 2020 at 21:57, Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> Patch all drivers and core code which uses mmc_set_signal_voltage() >>>> and prepare it for the fact that mmc_set_signal_voltage() can return >>>> a value > 0, which would happen if the signal voltage switch did NOT >>>> happen, because the voltage was already set correctly. >>> >>> I am not sure why you want to change mmc_set_signal_voltage(), can you >>> elaborate on that? >>> >>> I thought we discussed changing mmc_regulator_set_vqmmc(), what am I missing? >> >> Because mmc_set_signal_voltage() optionally calls >> host->ops_>start_signal_voltage_switch() , which can now return value > >> 0 , so the rest of the core needs to be patched to cater for that. > > The issue that you wanted to solve (at least by looking at the > original patch) was to understand whether the vqmmc regulator changes > voltage level and then take different actions based on that in the > mmci host driver. > > You don't need to change anything related to mmc_set_signal_voltage() > to accomplish that, do you? Moreover, I am worried that it may affect > the host driver's expectations from when > ->start_signal_voltage_switch() may be called. So, shall I just patch all the sites which use mmc_regulator_set_vqmmc() with something like return mmc_regulator_set_vqmmc(); becomes ret = mmc_regulator_set_vqmmc(); if (ret > 0) ret = 0; return ret; ?
