[PATCH REPOST 1/2] arm/dt: Tegra: Update SDHCI nodes to match bindings

[PATCH REPOST 1/2] arm/dt: Tegra: Update SDHCI nodes to match bindings

[Stephen Warren]

The bindings were recently updated to have separate properties for each
type of GPIO. Update the Device Tree source to match that.

Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
---
I'd previously sent these to Grant assuming they'd go in his dt/next branch,
but perhaps these should go in through Arnd's arm-soc next/dt branch?

 arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts  |   12 ++++++------
 arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts |    6 +++---
 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts
index 4c05334..e581866 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts
@@ -57,14 +57,14 @@
 	};
 
 	sdhci@c8000200 {
-		gpios = <&gpio 69 0>, /* cd, gpio PI5 */
-			<&gpio 57 0>, /* wp, gpio PH1 */
-			<&gpio 155 0>; /* power, gpio PT3 */
+		cd-gpios = <&gpio 69 0>; /* gpio PI5 */
+		wp-gpios = <&gpio 57 0>; /* gpio PH1 */
+		power-gpios = <&gpio 155 0>; /* gpio PT3 */
 	};
 
 	sdhci@c8000600 {
-		gpios = <&gpio 58 0>, /* cd, gpio PH2 */
-			<&gpio 59 0>, /* wp, gpio PH3 */
-			<&gpio 70 0>; /* power, gpio PI6 */
+		cd-gpios = <&gpio 58 0>; /* gpio PH2 */
+		wp-gpios = <&gpio 59 0>; /* gpio PH3 */
+		power-gpios = <&gpio 70 0>; /* gpio PI6 */
 	};
 };
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts
index 1940cae..64cedca 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts
@@ -21,8 +21,8 @@
 	};
 
 	sdhci@c8000400 {
-		gpios = <&gpio 69 0>, /* cd, gpio PI5 */
-			<&gpio 57 0>, /* wp, gpio PH1 */
-			<&gpio 70 0>; /* power, gpio PI6 */
+		cd-gpios = <&gpio 69 0>; /* gpio PI5 */
+		wp-gpios = <&gpio 57 0>; /* gpio PH1 */
+		power-gpios = <&gpio 70 0>; /* gpio PI6 */
 	};
 };
-- 
1.7.0.4

[PATCH REPOST 2/2] arm/dt: Tegra: Add support-8bit to SDHCI nodes

[Stephen Warren]

For Seaboard's internal eMMC, this makes the difference between a
5.5MB/s and 10.2MB/s transfer rate. On Harmony, there wasn't any
measurable difference on my cheap/slow ~2MB/s card.

Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts  |    1 +
 arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts |    4 ++++
 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts
index e581866..0e225b8 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts
@@ -66,5 +66,6 @@
 		cd-gpios = <&gpio 58 0>; /* gpio PH2 */
 		wp-gpios = <&gpio 59 0>; /* gpio PH3 */
 		power-gpios = <&gpio 70 0>; /* gpio PI6 */
+		support-8bit;
 	};
 };
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts
index 64cedca..a72299b 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts
@@ -25,4 +25,8 @@
 		wp-gpios = <&gpio 57 0>; /* gpio PH1 */
 		power-gpios = <&gpio 70 0>; /* gpio PI6 */
 	};
+
+	sdhci@c8000600 {
+		support-8bit;
+	};
 };
-- 
1.7.0.4

Re: [PATCH REPOST 2/2] arm/dt: Tegra: Add support-8bit to SDHCI nodes

[Grant Likely]

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 10:46:26AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> For Seaboard's internal eMMC, this makes the difference between a
> 5.5MB/s and 10.2MB/s transfer rate. On Harmony, there wasn't any
> measurable difference on my cheap/slow ~2MB/s card.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>

Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely-s3s/WqlpOiPyB63q8FvJNQ@public.gmane.org>

> ---
>  arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts  |    1 +
>  arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts |    4 ++++
>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts
> index e581866..0e225b8 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts
> @@ -66,5 +66,6 @@
>  		cd-gpios = <&gpio 58 0>; /* gpio PH2 */
>  		wp-gpios = <&gpio 59 0>; /* gpio PH3 */
>  		power-gpios = <&gpio 70 0>; /* gpio PI6 */
> +		support-8bit;
>  	};
>  };
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts
> index 64cedca..a72299b 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts
> @@ -25,4 +25,8 @@
>  		wp-gpios = <&gpio 57 0>; /* gpio PH1 */
>  		power-gpios = <&gpio 70 0>; /* gpio PI6 */
>  	};
> +
> +	sdhci@c8000600 {
> +		support-8bit;
> +	};
>  };
> -- 
> 1.7.0.4
> 

Re: [PATCH REPOST 1/2] arm/dt: Tegra: Update SDHCI nodes to match bindings

[Grant Likely]

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 10:46:25AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote:
> The bindings were recently updated to have separate properties for each
> type of GPIO. Update the Device Tree source to match that.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof-nZhT3qVonbNeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org>

Acked-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely-s3s/WqlpOiPyB63q8FvJNQ@public.gmane.org>

> ---
> I'd previously sent these to Grant assuming they'd go in his dt/next branch,
> but perhaps these should go in through Arnd's arm-soc next/dt branch?

Yes, they should probably go via Arnd's tree.

g.

> 
>  arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts  |   12 ++++++------
>  arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts |    6 +++---
>  2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts
> index 4c05334..e581866 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-harmony.dts
> @@ -57,14 +57,14 @@
>  	};
>  
>  	sdhci@c8000200 {
> -		gpios = <&gpio 69 0>, /* cd, gpio PI5 */
> -			<&gpio 57 0>, /* wp, gpio PH1 */
> -			<&gpio 155 0>; /* power, gpio PT3 */
> +		cd-gpios = <&gpio 69 0>; /* gpio PI5 */
> +		wp-gpios = <&gpio 57 0>; /* gpio PH1 */
> +		power-gpios = <&gpio 155 0>; /* gpio PT3 */
>  	};
>  
>  	sdhci@c8000600 {
> -		gpios = <&gpio 58 0>, /* cd, gpio PH2 */
> -			<&gpio 59 0>, /* wp, gpio PH3 */
> -			<&gpio 70 0>; /* power, gpio PI6 */
> +		cd-gpios = <&gpio 58 0>; /* gpio PH2 */
> +		wp-gpios = <&gpio 59 0>; /* gpio PH3 */
> +		power-gpios = <&gpio 70 0>; /* gpio PI6 */
>  	};
>  };
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts
> index 1940cae..64cedca 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/tegra-seaboard.dts
> @@ -21,8 +21,8 @@
>  	};
>  
>  	sdhci@c8000400 {
> -		gpios = <&gpio 69 0>, /* cd, gpio PI5 */
> -			<&gpio 57 0>, /* wp, gpio PH1 */
> -			<&gpio 70 0>; /* power, gpio PI6 */
> +		cd-gpios = <&gpio 69 0>; /* gpio PI5 */
> +		wp-gpios = <&gpio 57 0>; /* gpio PH1 */
> +		power-gpios = <&gpio 70 0>; /* gpio PI6 */
>  	};
>  };
> -- 
> 1.7.0.4
> 

Re: [PATCH REPOST 1/2] arm/dt: Tegra: Update SDHCI nodes to match bindings

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Tuesday 20 September 2011, Stephen Warren wrote:
> The bindings were recently updated to have separate properties for each
> type of GPIO. Update the Device Tree source to match that.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof-nZhT3qVonbNeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org>
> ---
> I'd previously sent these to Grant assuming they'd go in his dt/next branch,
> but perhaps these should go in through Arnd's arm-soc next/dt branch?
> 

Which tree has the update that changed the bindings? I think it should
go into the same one.

If it's already upstream, I can take it into the fixes branch.

	Arnd

RE: [PATCH REPOST 1/2] arm/dt: Tegra: Update SDHCI nodes to match bindings

[Stephen Warren]

Arnd Bergmann wrote at Tuesday, September 20, 2011 11:43 AM:
> On Tuesday 20 September 2011, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > The bindings were recently updated to have separate properties for each
> > type of GPIO. Update the Device Tree source to match that.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
> > Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
> > ---
> > I'd previously sent these to Grant assuming they'd go in his dt/next branch,
> > but perhaps these should go in through Arnd's arm-soc next/dt branch?
> >
> 
> Which tree has the update that changed the bindings? I think it should
> go into the same one.
> 
> If it's already upstream, I can take it into the fixes branch.

Chris applied them to the mmc-next tree:

git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/cjb/mmc.git

which appears to be temporarily at:

git://dev.laptop.org/users/cjb/mmc

-- 
nvpublic

Re: [PATCH REPOST 1/2] arm/dt: Tegra: Update SDHCI nodes to match bindings

[Chris Ball]

Hi,

On Tue, Sep 20 2011, Stephen Warren wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann wrote at Tuesday, September 20, 2011 11:43 AM:
>> On Tuesday 20 September 2011, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> > The bindings were recently updated to have separate properties for each
>> > type of GPIO. Update the Device Tree source to match that.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
>> > Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof-nZhT3qVonbNeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org>
>> > ---
>> > I'd previously sent these to Grant assuming they'd go in his dt/next branch,
>> > but perhaps these should go in through Arnd's arm-soc next/dt branch?
>> >
>> 
>> Which tree has the update that changed the bindings? I think it should
>> go into the same one.
>> 
>> If it's already upstream, I can take it into the fixes branch.
>
> Chris applied them to the mmc-next tree:
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/cjb/mmc.git
>
> which appears to be temporarily at:
>
> git://dev.laptop.org/users/cjb/mmc

Sending these via Arnd's next/dt sounds good to me.  I know we'd usually
take changes that require an atomic update through the same tree, but
Stephen said in https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/8/30/352 :

   I don't think there's actually any need for that; initializing
   Tegra's SDHCI from device-tree has never worked in mainline to date;
   it relies on patch 1 being there. And if patch 2 was there without
   patch 3, the worst that will happen is some port runs in 4-bit mode
   instead of 8-bit, which evidently works fine since I didn't even
   notice 8-bit support was missing...

Thanks,

- Chris.
-- 
Chris Ball   <cjb-2X9k7bc8m7Mdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>   <http://printf.net/>
One Laptop Per Child

Re: [PATCH REPOST 1/2] arm/dt: Tegra: Update SDHCI nodes to match bindings

[Grant Likely]

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 07:43:29PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 September 2011, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > The bindings were recently updated to have separate properties for each
> > type of GPIO. Update the Device Tree source to match that.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
> > Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
> > ---
> > I'd previously sent these to Grant assuming they'd go in his dt/next branch,
> > but perhaps these should go in through Arnd's arm-soc next/dt branch?
> > 
> 
> Which tree has the update that changed the bindings? I think it should
> go into the same one.
> 
> If it's already upstream, I can take it into the fixes branch.

Already upstream

g.

Re: [PATCH REPOST 1/2] arm/dt: Tegra: Update SDHCI nodes to match bindings

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Tuesday 20 September 2011, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 07:43:29PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > On Tuesday 20 September 2011, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > > The bindings were recently updated to have separate properties for each
> > > type of GPIO. Update the Device Tree source to match that.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
> > > Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof-nZhT3qVonbNeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org>
> > > ---
> > > I'd previously sent these to Grant assuming they'd go in his dt/next branch,
> > > but perhaps these should go in through Arnd's arm-soc next/dt branch?
> > > 
> > 
> > Which tree has the update that changed the bindings? I think it should
> > go into the same one.
> > 
> > If it's already upstream, I can take it into the fixes branch.
> 
> Already upstream

Ok, I see. I've applied both patches to the fixes branch and will send
it out with the next pull request for 3.1 to Linus then.

Thanks,

	Arnd

Re: [PATCH REPOST 1/2] arm/dt: Tegra: Update SDHCI nodes to match bindings

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Tuesday 20 September 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 September 2011, Grant Likely wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 07:43:29PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 20 September 2011, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > > > The bindings were recently updated to have separate properties for each
> > > > type of GPIO. Update the Device Tree source to match that.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
> > > > Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
> > > > ---
> > > > I'd previously sent these to Grant assuming they'd go in his dt/next branch,
> > > > but perhaps these should go in through Arnd's arm-soc next/dt branch?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Which tree has the update that changed the bindings? I think it should
> > > go into the same one.
> > > 
> > > If it's already upstream, I can take it into the fixes branch.
> > 
> > Already upstream
> 
> Ok, I see. I've applied both patches to the fixes branch and will send
> it out with the next pull request for 3.1 to Linus then.

Sorry, I just noticed that the second patch is not a bug fix, so I took it out
again and kept only patch 1/2 in the fixes branch for 3.1.

Should I take the other one as well? It's probably better to let that
go the proper way through the tegra tree for 3.2, right?

	Arnd

Re: [PATCH REPOST 1/2] arm/dt: Tegra: Update SDHCI nodes to match bindings

[Olof Johansson]

On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Tuesday 20 September 2011, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> On Tuesday 20 September 2011, Grant Likely wrote:
>> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 07:43:29PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
>> > > On Tuesday 20 September 2011, Stephen Warren wrote:
>> > > > The bindings were recently updated to have separate properties for each
>> > > > type of GPIO. Update the Device Tree source to match that.
>> > > >
>> > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@nvidia.com>
>> > > > Acked-by: Olof Johansson <olof@lixom.net>
>> > > > ---
>> > > > I'd previously sent these to Grant assuming they'd go in his dt/next branch,
>> > > > but perhaps these should go in through Arnd's arm-soc next/dt branch?
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > Which tree has the update that changed the bindings? I think it should
>> > > go into the same one.
>> > >
>> > > If it's already upstream, I can take it into the fixes branch.
>> >
>> > Already upstream
>>
>> Ok, I see. I've applied both patches to the fixes branch and will send
>> it out with the next pull request for 3.1 to Linus then.
>
> Sorry, I just noticed that the second patch is not a bug fix, so I took it out
> again and kept only patch 1/2 in the fixes branch for 3.1.
>
> Should I take the other one as well? It's probably better to let that
> go the proper way through the tegra tree for 3.2, right?

Given that you have a public tree right now, and I don't (since
kernel.org is down), please feel free to start a tegra/for-3.2 branch
for me and apply it there. I'll base further work on top of that if
needed.

(There also aren't a whole lot of other patches queued for 3.2 right now).

-Olof

Re: [PATCH REPOST 1/2] arm/dt: Tegra: Update SDHCI nodes to match bindings

[Arnd Bergmann]

On Tuesday 20 September 2011, Olof Johansson wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> wrote:

> > Should I take the other one as well? It's probably better to let that
> > go the proper way through the tegra tree for 3.2, right?
> 
> Given that you have a public tree right now, and I don't (since
> kernel.org is down), please feel free to start a tegra/for-3.2 branch
> for me and apply it there. I'll base further work on top of that if
> needed.
> 
> (There also aren't a whole lot of other patches queued for 3.2 right now).

Ok, I've put it into the next/fixes branch now, so it will be in 3.2.

Thanks,

	Arnd