On 2021-06-23 01:47, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Quoting Shaik Sajida Bhanu (2021-06-16 02:23:01)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts
b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts
index 3900cfc..0f63cac 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
#include <dt-bindings/iio/qcom,spmi-adc7-pmr735b.h>
#include <dt-bindings/iio/qcom,spmi-adc7-pm8350.h>
#include <dt-bindings/iio/qcom,spmi-adc7-pmk8350.h>
+#include <dt-bindings/gpio/gpio.h>
The letter g comes before i, please move this higher in the list.
Sure i will adrress this in my next patchset.
#include "sc7280.dtsi"
#include "pm7325.dtsi"
#include "pmr735a.dtsi"
@@ -272,6 +273,34 @@
status = "okay";
};
+&sdhc_1 {
+ status = "okay";
+
+ pinctrl-names = "default", "sleep";
+ pinctrl-0 = <&sdc1_on>;
+ pinctrl-1 = <&sdc1_off>;
+
+ non-removable;
+ no-sd;
+ no-sdio;
+
+ vmmc-supply = <&vreg_l7b_2p9>;
+ vqmmc-supply = <&vreg_l19b_1p8>;
+};
+
+&sdhc_2 {
+ status = "okay";
+
+ pinctrl-names = "default", "sleep";
+ pinctrl-0 = <&sdc2_on>;
+ pinctrl-1 = <&sdc2_off>;
+
+ vmmc-supply = <&vreg_l9c_2p9>;
+ vqmmc-supply = <&vreg_l6c_2p9>;
+
+ cd-gpios = <&tlmm 91 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
+};
+
&uart5 {
status = "okay";
};
@@ -291,3 +320,55 @@
bias-pull-up;
};
};
+
+&tlmm {
+ sdc1_on: sdc1-on {
+ clk {
+ pins = "sdc1_clk";
Can the pins property at least be moved into sc7280.dtsi? Then this can
add bias and drive strength overrides in the board file?
Sure i will adrress this in my next patchset.
+ bias-disable;
+ drive-strength = <16>;
+ };
+
+ cmd {
+ pins = "sdc1_cmd";
+ bias-pull-up;
+ drive-strength = <10>;
+ };
+
+ data {
+ pins = "sdc1_data";
+ bias-pull-up;
+ drive-strength = <10>;
+ };
+
+ rclk {
+ pins = "sdc1_rclk";
+ bias-pull-down;
+ };
+ };
+
+ sdc2_on: sdc2-on {
+ clk {
+ pins = "sdc2_clk";
+ bias-disable;
+ drive-strength = <16>;
+ };
+
+ cmd {
+ pins = "sdc2_cmd";
+ bias-pull-up;
+ drive-strength = <10>;
+ };
+
+ data {
+ pins = "sdc2_data";
+ bias-pull-up;
+ drive-strength = <10>;
+ };
+
+ sd-cd {
+ pins = "gpio91";
+ bias-pull-up;
+ };
+ };
+};
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
index d600bca..16d8e17 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
@@ -974,6 +1033,51 @@
};
};
+ sdhc_2: sdhci@8804000 {
+ compatible = "qcom,sc7280-sdhci",
"qcom,sdhci-msm-v5";
+ status = "disabled";
+
+ reg = <0 0x08804000 0 0x1000>;
+
+ iommus = <&apps_smmu 0x100 0x0>;
+ interrupts = <GIC_SPI 207
IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
+ <GIC_SPI 223
IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+ interrupt-names = "hc_irq", "pwr_irq";
+
+ clocks = <&gcc GCC_SDCC2_APPS_CLK>,
+ <&gcc GCC_SDCC2_AHB_CLK>,
+ <&rpmhcc RPMH_CXO_CLK>;
+ clock-names = "core", "iface", "xo";
+ interconnects = <&aggre1_noc MASTER_SDCC_2 0
&mc_virt SLAVE_EBI1 0>,
+ <&gem_noc MASTER_APPSS_PROC 0
&cnoc2 SLAVE_SDCC_2 0>;
+ interconnect-names = "sdhc-ddr","cpu-sdhc";
+ power-domains = <&rpmhpd SC7280_CX>;
+ operating-points-v2 = <&sdhc2_opp_table>;
+
+ bus-width = <4>;
+
+ qcom,dll-config = <0x0007642c>;
+
+ sdhc2_opp_table: sdhc2-opp-table {
Any reason the node shouldn't be called opp-table?
Yes, it can be called but for consistency, we are using the same node
names as that on sc7180.
