On Wed, Nov 27, 2024 at 05:50:29PM +0800, Yuanjie Yang wrote: > Qualcomm regulator supports two power supply modes: HPM and LPM. > Currently, the sdhci-msm.c driver does not set the load to adjust > the current for eMMC and SD. Therefore, if the regulator set load > in LPM state, it will lead to the inability to properly initialize > eMMC and SD. > > Set the correct regulator current for eMMC and SD to ensure that the > device can work normally even when the regulator is in LPM. > > Signed-off-by: Yuanjie Yang <quic_yuanjiey@xxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Changes in v2: > - Add enum msm_reg_type to optimize the code Please re-optimize the code to make it easy to read and understand. > - Delete redundant emmc type judgment > - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20241122075048.2006894-1-quic_yuanjiey@xxxxxxxxxxx/ > > --- > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c | 92 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 90 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c > index e00208535bd1..fc13ef60ab61 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c > @@ -134,9 +134,22 @@ > /* Timeout value to avoid infinite waiting for pwr_irq */ > #define MSM_PWR_IRQ_TIMEOUT_MS 5000 > > +/* Max load for eMMC Vdd supply */ > +#define MMC_VMMC_MAX_LOAD_UA 570000 > + > /* Max load for eMMC Vdd-io supply */ > #define MMC_VQMMC_MAX_LOAD_UA 325000 > > +/* Max load for SD Vdd supply */ > +#define SD_VMMC_MAX_LOAD_UA 800000 > + > +/* Max load for SD Vdd-io supply */ > +#define SD_VQMMC_MAX_LOAD_UA 22000 > + > +#define MAX_MMC_SD_VMMC_LOAD_UA max(MMC_VMMC_MAX_LOAD_UA, SD_VMMC_MAX_LOAD_UA) > + > +#define MAX_MMC_SD_VQMMC_LOAD_UA max(MMC_VQMMC_MAX_LOAD_UA, SD_VQMMC_MAX_LOAD_UA) > + > #define msm_host_readl(msm_host, host, offset) \ > msm_host->var_ops->msm_readl_relaxed(host, offset) > > @@ -147,6 +160,11 @@ > #define CQHCI_VENDOR_CFG1 0xA00 > #define CQHCI_VENDOR_DIS_RST_ON_CQ_EN (0x3 << 13) > > +enum msm_reg_type { > + VMMC_REGULATOR, > + VQMMC_REGULATOR, > +}; > + > struct sdhci_msm_offset { > u32 core_hc_mode; > u32 core_mci_data_cnt; > @@ -1403,11 +1421,71 @@ static int sdhci_msm_set_pincfg(struct sdhci_msm_host *msm_host, bool level) > return ret; > } > > -static int sdhci_msm_set_vmmc(struct mmc_host *mmc) > +static int sdhci_msm_get_regulator_load(struct mmc_host *mmc, int max_current, > + enum msm_reg_type type) > +{ > + int load = 0; > + > + /* > + * When eMMC and SD are powered on for the first time, select a higher > + * current value from the corresponding current for eMMC and SD to > + * ensure that the eMMC and SD cards start up properly and complete > + * initialization. After the initialization process is finished, use > + * the corresponding current to set the eMMC and SD to ensure the > + * normal work of the device. > + */ > + > + if (!mmc->card) > + return max_current; max_current is type == VMMC_REGULATOR ? MAX_MMC_SD_VMMC_LOAD_UA : MAX_MMC_SD_VQMMC_LOAD_UA; Try to rewrite the patch so that you don't have the decisions spread across multiple levels in the callstack. > + > + if (mmc_card_mmc(mmc->card)) > + load = (type == VMMC_REGULATOR) ? MMC_VMMC_MAX_LOAD_UA : MMC_VQMMC_MAX_LOAD_UA; > + else if (mmc_card_sd(mmc->card)) > + load = (type == VMMC_REGULATOR) ? SD_VMMC_MAX_LOAD_UA : SD_VQMMC_MAX_LOAD_UA; > + > + return load; > +} > + > +static int msm_config_regulator_load(struct sdhci_msm_host *msm_host, struct mmc_host *mmc, > + bool hpm, int max_current, enum msm_reg_type type) > +{ > + int ret; > + int load = 0; > + > + /* > + * After the initialization process is finished, Once the type of card > + * is determined, only set the corresponding current for SD and eMMC. > + */ > + > + if (mmc->card && !(mmc_card_mmc(mmc->card) || mmc_card_sd(mmc->card))) > + return 0; > + > + if (hpm) > + load = sdhci_msm_get_regulator_load(mmc, max_current, type); Does !hpm happen when regulators are enabled or always together with a regulator_disable? (The regulator framework skips the load of disabled regulators when aggregating) > + > + if (type == VMMC_REGULATOR) > + ret = regulator_set_load(mmc->supply.vmmc, load); > + else > + ret = regulator_set_load(mmc->supply.vqmmc, load); > + if (ret) > + dev_err(mmc_dev(mmc), "%s: set load failed: %d\n", > + mmc_hostname(mmc), ret); > + return ret; > +} > + > +static int sdhci_msm_set_vmmc(struct sdhci_msm_host *msm_host, > + struct mmc_host *mmc, bool hpm) > { > + int ret; > + > if (IS_ERR(mmc->supply.vmmc)) > return 0; > > + ret = msm_config_regulator_load(msm_host, mmc, hpm, > + MAX_MMC_SD_VMMC_LOAD_UA, VMMC_REGULATOR); msm_config_regulator_load() is mostly 2 different functions with multiple levels of conditional code paths depending on this last parameter. Please try to refactor this to avoid overloading the functions like that. Regards, Bjorn > + if (ret) > + return ret; > + > return mmc_regulator_set_ocr(mmc, mmc->supply.vmmc, mmc->ios.vdd); > } > > @@ -1435,6 +1513,15 @@ static int msm_toggle_vqmmc(struct sdhci_msm_host *msm_host, > goto out; > } > } > + > + ret = msm_config_regulator_load(msm_host, mmc, level, > + MAX_MMC_SD_VQMMC_LOAD_UA, VQMMC_REGULATOR); > + if (ret < 0) { > + dev_err(mmc_dev(mmc), "%s: vqmmc set regulator load failed: %d\n", > + mmc_hostname(mmc), ret); > + goto out; > + } > + > ret = regulator_enable(mmc->supply.vqmmc); > } else { > ret = regulator_disable(mmc->supply.vqmmc); > @@ -1642,7 +1729,8 @@ static void sdhci_msm_handle_pwr_irq(struct sdhci_host *host, int irq) > } > > if (pwr_state) { > - ret = sdhci_msm_set_vmmc(mmc); > + ret = sdhci_msm_set_vmmc(msm_host, mmc, > + pwr_state & REQ_BUS_ON); > if (!ret) > ret = sdhci_msm_set_vqmmc(msm_host, mmc, > pwr_state & REQ_BUS_ON); > -- > 2.34.1 > >
