Hi,
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 5:04 PM, Adrian Hunter
<ext-adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> ext Kim Kyuwon wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 6:11 AM, David Brownell <david-b@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Friday 20 February 2009, Kim Kyuwon wrote:
>>>> +static void omap_hsmmc_init(struct mmc_omap_host *host)
>>>> +{
>>>> + u32 hctl, capa, value;
>>>> +
>>>> + /* Only MMC1 supports 3.0V */
>>>> + if (host->id == OMAP_MMC1_DEVID) {
>>>> + hctl = SDVS30;
>>> Shouldn't it be remembering what voltage it was using,
>>> and then restore that, instead of always making MMC1
>>> restart at a 3.0V level? That's pretty awkward to test
>>> unless you have a 1.8V-capable card in MMC1...
>>
>> You are somewhat right, thank you.
>> But remebering what voltage it was using doesn't feasible to me,
>> because the card can be changed while in 'Sleep' state. I should have
>> inserted a function that detect the right voltage after intializing. I
>> will resend the patch later.
>
> Doesn't it already do that? Can you explain more?
>
> Although I have not tested it, I very much doubt
> dual-voltage cards work. That is because VMMC1_185V
> is zero, which has the side-effect of turning the
> regulator off (see arch/arm/mach-omap2/mmc-twl4030.c)
It's also to difficult to test in our H/W since it's configured only
support 3.0V.
How about to separate it two phases, first fix the mmc suspend/resume
works again, and then verify dual voltage if there are these hardware
How to you think?
Thank you,
Kyungmin Park
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
