From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jaehoon Chung Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] mmc: core: use the broken-cd for non-removable card Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 19:51:53 +0900 Message-ID: <52E78BC9.9010209@samsung.com> References: <52E7695B.2050504@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailout4.samsung.com ([203.254.224.34]:52224 "EHLO mailout4.samsung.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751569AbaA1KvY (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jan 2014 05:51:24 -0500 Received: from epcpsbgr4.samsung.com (u144.gpu120.samsung.co.kr [203.254.230.144]) by mailout4.samsung.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-24.01 (7.0.4.24.0) 64bit (built Nov 17 2011)) with ESMTP id <0N0300HLRY5MU080@mailout4.samsung.com> for linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org; Tue, 28 Jan 2014 19:51:23 +0900 (KST) In-reply-to: Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org To: Ulf Hansson , Jaehoon Chung Cc: "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" , Chris Ball , Arnd Bergmann , Seungwon Jeon Dear, Ulf. On 01/28/2014 07:32 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 28 January 2014 09:24, Jaehoon Chung wrote: >> Some SoC is used the broken card-detection. >> And it should be also used the "non-removable". >> Even if card is "non-removable", it didn't always use the cd-gpio. >> >> If it's used only broken-cd, then card-detect interrupt is polling. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jaehoon Chung >> --- >> drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 4 ++-- >> drivers/mmc/core/host.c | 6 +++--- >> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c >> index 098374b..df732aa 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c >> @@ -2460,8 +2460,8 @@ void mmc_rescan(struct work_struct *work) >> */ >> mmc_bus_put(host); >> >> - if (!(host->caps & MMC_CAP_NONREMOVABLE) && host->ops->get_cd && >> - host->ops->get_cd(host) == 0) { >> + if (host->ops->get_cd && host->ops->get_cd(host) == 0 && >> + !(host->caps & MMC_CAP_NONREMOVABLE)) { > > What's the difference here? eMMC is non-removable card. So i added the "non-removable" property at dt file. Then first checking !(host->caps & MMC_CAP_NONREMOVABLE), and didn't call get_cd(). In case of dw-mmc.c, after calling get_cd(), CARD_PRESENT bit is set at dw_mci_get_cd(). I didn't check other driver how it work. If you didn't this change, i will change the dw-mmc controller. > >> mmc_claim_host(host); >> mmc_power_off(host); >> mmc_release_host(host); >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/host.c b/drivers/mmc/core/host.c >> index 4b81c93..52a64fe 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/host.c >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/host.c >> @@ -356,6 +356,9 @@ int mmc_of_parse(struct mmc_host *host) >> * configuration is performed. >> */ >> >> + if (of_find_property(np, "broken-cd", &len)) >> + host->caps |= MMC_CAP_NEEDS_POLL; >> + > > No. There are no meaning in using MMC_CAP_NEEDS_POLL in conjunction > with MMC_CAP_NONREMOVABLE. > > Using MMC_CAP_NONREMOVABLE, will allow mmc_rescan to detect a card - > only for one iteration. Thus MMC_CAP_NEEDS_POLL will have no effect. Sorry. You're right. It's no meaning. I will maintain the original code. Best Regards, Jaehoon Chung > > Kind regards > Uffe > > >> /* Parse Card Detection */ >> if (of_find_property(np, "non-removable", &len)) { >> host->caps |= MMC_CAP_NONREMOVABLE; >> @@ -364,9 +367,6 @@ int mmc_of_parse(struct mmc_host *host) >> >> explicit_inv_cd = of_property_read_bool(np, "cd-inverted"); >> >> - if (of_find_property(np, "broken-cd", &len)) >> - host->caps |= MMC_CAP_NEEDS_POLL; >> - >> gpio = of_get_named_gpio_flags(np, "cd-gpios", 0, &flags); >> if (gpio == -EPROBE_DEFER) >> return gpio; >> -- >> 1.7.9.5 > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >