[PATCH 0/3] mmc: omap_hsmmc: get rid of ti,non-removable

[PATCH 0/3] mmc: omap_hsmmc: get rid of ti,non-removable

[Sekhar Nori]

Get rid of TI specific binding ti,non-removable in favour of the
generic binding present for the same purpose.

This patch set does not support the old binding anymore. So, yes,
it does introduce an ABI breakage. IMHO, it is not really worth
supporting both bindings ATM since DT-usage in OMAP is still very
nascent and almost always DTB and uImage are upgraded together.

The series applies to Koen's series titled "ARM: dts: Beaglebone MMC fixes"

The patch set is tested on Bone Black, but I could not get the eMMC
to detect on my board with or without this patch set. The removable
MMC/SD works though.

Sekhar Nori (3):
  mmc: omap_hsmmc: remove TI specific DT binding for non removable
    cards
  ARM: OMAP2+: DT: start using generic binding for non-removable mmc
    cards
  ARM: OMAP2+: BBB DT: mark eMMC as non removable

 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/ti-omap-hsmmc.txt |    5 ++---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-boneblack.dts                  |    1 +
 arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-panda-common.dtsi               |    2 +-
 arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-sdp.dts                         |    4 ++--
 arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-var-som.dts                     |    2 +-
 arch/arm/boot/dts/omap5-uevm.dts                        |    4 ++--
 drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c                           |    2 +-
 7 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

-- 
1.7.10.1

[PATCH 1/3] mmc: omap_hsmmc: remove TI specific DT binding for non removable cards

[Sekhar Nori]

Remove the vendor specific "ti,non-removable" DT binding and
support the generic binding "non-removable" instead.

Signed-off-by: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@ti.com>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/ti-omap-hsmmc.txt |    5 ++---
 drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c                           |    2 +-
 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/ti-omap-hsmmc.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/ti-omap-hsmmc.txt
index 8c8908a..0d463b8 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/ti-omap-hsmmc.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/ti-omap-hsmmc.txt
@@ -17,7 +17,6 @@ Optional properties:
 ti,dual-volt: boolean, supports dual voltage cards
 <supply-name>-supply: phandle to the regulator device tree node
 "supply-name" examples are "vmmc", "vmmc_aux" etc
-ti,non-removable: non-removable slot (like eMMC)
 ti,needs-special-reset: Requires a special softreset sequence
 ti,needs-special-hs-handling: HSMMC IP needs special setting for handling High Speed
 dmas: List of DMA specifiers with the controller specific format
@@ -38,7 +37,7 @@ Examples:
 		ti,dual-volt;
 		bus-width = <4>;
 		vmmc-supply = <&vmmc>; /* phandle to regulator node */
-		ti,non-removable;
+		non-removable;
 	};
 
 [generic DMA request binding]
@@ -50,7 +49,7 @@ Examples:
 		ti,dual-volt;
 		bus-width = <4>;
 		vmmc-supply = <&vmmc>; /* phandle to regulator node */
-		ti,non-removable;
+		non-removable;
 		dmas = <&edma 24
 			&edma 25>;
 		dma-names = "tx", "rx";
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c
index 6ac63df..0cb06ff 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c
@@ -1738,7 +1738,7 @@ static struct omap_mmc_platform_data *of_get_hsmmc_pdata(struct device *dev)
 	pdata->slots[0].switch_pin = cd_gpio;
 	pdata->slots[0].gpio_wp = wp_gpio;
 
-	if (of_find_property(np, "ti,non-removable", NULL)) {
+	if (of_find_property(np, "non-removable", NULL)) {
 		pdata->slots[0].nonremovable = true;
 		pdata->slots[0].no_regulator_off_init = true;
 	}
-- 
1.7.10.1

[PATCH 2/3] ARM: OMAP2+: DT: start using generic binding for non-removable mmc cards

[Sekhar Nori]

The TI specific binding for non-removable cards is now gone.
The driver supports the generic binding, start using it.

Signed-off-by: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-panda-common.dtsi |    2 +-
 arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-sdp.dts           |    4 ++--
 arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-var-som.dts       |    2 +-
 arch/arm/boot/dts/omap5-uevm.dts          |    4 ++--
 4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-panda-common.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-panda-common.dtsi
index faa95b5..8dcefc0 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-panda-common.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-panda-common.dtsi
@@ -314,7 +314,7 @@
 };
 
 &mmc5 {
-	ti,non-removable;
+	non-removable;
 	bus-width = <4>;
 };
 
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-sdp.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-sdp.dts
index 7951b4e..ecce3f5 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-sdp.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-sdp.dts
@@ -408,7 +408,7 @@
 &mmc2 {
 	vmmc-supply = <&vaux1>;
 	bus-width = <8>;
-	ti,non-removable;
+	non-removable;
 };
 
 &mmc3 {
@@ -421,7 +421,7 @@
 
 &mmc5 {
 	bus-width = <4>;
-	ti,non-removable;
+	non-removable;
 };
 
 &emif1 {
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-var-som.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-var-som.dts
index b41269e..b25b9ad 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-var-som.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap4-var-som.dts
@@ -76,7 +76,7 @@
 &mmc1 {
 	vmmc-supply = <&vmmc>;
 	ti,bus-width = <8>;
-	ti,non-removable;
+	non-removable;
 };
 
 &mmc2 {
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap5-uevm.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap5-uevm.dts
index 65d7b60..67d6ed7 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap5-uevm.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap5-uevm.dts
@@ -242,12 +242,12 @@
 &mmc2 {
 	vmmc-supply = <&vmmcsd_fixed>;
 	bus-width = <8>;
-	ti,non-removable;
+	non-removable;
 };
 
 &mmc3 {
 	bus-width = <4>;
-	ti,non-removable;
+	non-removable;
 };
 
 &mmc4 {
-- 
1.7.10.1

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[PATCH 3/3] ARM: OMAP2+: BBB DT: mark eMMC as non removable

[Sekhar Nori]

Mark the eMMC module on BeagleBone black as non removable.

Signed-off-by: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-boneblack.dts |    1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-boneblack.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-boneblack.dts
index f4703cf..58515dc 100644
--- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-boneblack.dts
+++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-boneblack.dts
@@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
 	pinctrl-names = "default";
 	pinctrl-0 = <&emmc_pins>;
 	bus-width = <8>;
+	non-removable;
 	status = "okay";
 	ti,vcc-aux-disable-is-sleep;
 };
-- 
1.7.10.1

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 3/3] ARM: OMAP2+: BBB DT: mark eMMC as non removable

[Koen Kooi]

Op 13 sep. 2013, om 12:09 heeft Sekhar Nori <nsekhar-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org> het volgende geschreven:

> Mark the eMMC module on BeagleBone black as non removable.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>

Acked-by: Koen Kooi <koen-QLwJDigV5abLmq1fohREcCpxlwaOVQ5f@public.gmane.org>

> ---
> arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-boneblack.dts |    1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-boneblack.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-boneblack.dts
> index f4703cf..58515dc 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-boneblack.dts
> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/am335x-boneblack.dts
> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
> 	pinctrl-names = "default";
> 	pinctrl-0 = <&emmc_pins>;
> 	bus-width = <8>;
> +	non-removable;
> 	status = "okay";
> 	ti,vcc-aux-disable-is-sleep;
> };
> -- 
> 1.7.10.1
> 

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 3/3] ARM: OMAP2+: BBB DT: mark eMMC as non removable

[Sekhar Nori]

On Friday 13 September 2013 03:39 PM, Sekhar Nori wrote:
> Mark the eMMC module on BeagleBone black as non removable.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>

The patches which touch dts files are not really following the subject
line conventions. I will fix that and send a v2.

Thanks to Nishant for pointing out.

Thanks,
Sekhar
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 0/3] mmc: omap_hsmmc: get rid of ti,non-removable

[Tony Lindgren]

* Sekhar Nori <nsekhar-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org> [130913 03:18]:
> Get rid of TI specific binding ti,non-removable in favour of the
> generic binding present for the same purpose.

Looks like there's a different handling in the MMC driver
for no_regulator_off_init that's needed for eMMC. That needs to
be sorted out and tested first.
 
> This patch set does not support the old binding anymore. So, yes,
> it does introduce an ABI breakage. IMHO, it is not really worth
> supporting both bindings ATM since DT-usage in OMAP is still very
> nascent and almost always DTB and uImage are upgraded together.

The old bindings must be supported. It's not like we can just drop
them. We should just keep the old binding and parse it the same way
as the generic binding. That's a minimal amount of code.

After the issue with no_regulator_off_init has been solved, then
we can naturally update the existing .dts files to use the generic
binding.

Regards,

Tony
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 0/3] mmc: omap_hsmmc: get rid of ti,non-removable

[Balaji T K]

On Friday 13 September 2013 09:07 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Sekhar Nori <nsekhar-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org> [130913 03:18]:
>> Get rid of TI specific binding ti,non-removable in favour of the
>> generic binding present for the same purpose.
>
> Looks like there's a different handling in the MMC driver
> for no_regulator_off_init that's needed for eMMC. That needs to
> be sorted out and tested first.
>
Hi Sekhar,

no_regulator_off_init is needed for eMMC detection on omap4 platforms.

>> This patch set does not support the old binding anymore. So, yes,
>> it does introduce an ABI breakage. IMHO, it is not really worth
>> supporting both bindings ATM since DT-usage in OMAP is still very
>> nascent and almost always DTB and uImage are upgraded together.
>
> The old bindings must be supported. It's not like we can just drop
> them. We should just keep the old binding and parse it the same way
> as the generic binding. That's a minimal amount of code.
>
> After the issue with no_regulator_off_init has been solved, then
> we can naturally update the existing .dts files to use the generic
> binding.
>
> Regards,
>
> Tony
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
> the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 0/3] mmc: omap_hsmmc: get rid of ti,non-removable

[Sekhar Nori]

On Friday 13 September 2013 09:07 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Sekhar Nori <nsekhar-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org> [130913 03:18]:
>> Get rid of TI specific binding ti,non-removable in favour of the
>> generic binding present for the same purpose.
> 
> Looks like there's a different handling in the MMC driver
> for no_regulator_off_init that's needed for eMMC. That needs to
> be sorted out and tested first.

Okay. I couldn't really get the eMMC on my board to detect, but
apparently Koen has been able to get it to work. I am not really deep
into details of HSMMC driver so will check with Balaji on what needs to
be done here.

>> This patch set does not support the old binding anymore. So, yes,
>> it does introduce an ABI breakage. IMHO, it is not really worth
>> supporting both bindings ATM since DT-usage in OMAP is still very
>> nascent and almost always DTB and uImage are upgraded together.
> 
> The old bindings must be supported. It's not like we can just drop
> them. We should just keep the old binding and parse it the same way
> as the generic binding. That's a minimal amount of code.

Yes, its minimal amount of code but its code that will very likely never
get exercised in future because of the reasons I mentioned above. I fear
in time we will accumulate a lot of unused code this way.

Anyway, since you don't feel its okay to remove the old binding, I will
go ahead and mark the old binding as deprecated. But perhaps we can
come-up with some time frame within which users of old .dtb can upgrade
their .dtb or consider never upgrading to a newer kernel? This sounds
eerily similar to feature-removal-schedule.txt and yeah I am aware of
what happened to that. But I still put it here since this problem of DTB
compatibility is not going to go away.

One thing that might help is a kernel configuration that does not
support deprecated bindings so users of old dtbs can actually see what
deprecated bindings they are using. This way they can probably plan for
a dtb upgrade better. So in driver you would do something like:

	if (of_support_deprecated_bindings() &&
	    of_find_property(np, "ti,non-removable", NULL)) {
		.. do something ..
	}

of_support_deprecated_bindings() would return based on a config option.

Thanks,
Sekhar

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 0/3] mmc: omap_hsmmc: get rid of ti,non-removable

[Sekhar Nori]

On Saturday 14 September 2013 03:37 AM, Balaji T K wrote:
> On Friday 13 September 2013 09:07 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>> * Sekhar Nori <nsekhar-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org> [130913 03:18]:
>>> Get rid of TI specific binding ti,non-removable in favour of the
>>> generic binding present for the same purpose.
>>
>> Looks like there's a different handling in the MMC driver
>> for no_regulator_off_init that's needed for eMMC. That needs to
>> be sorted out and tested first.
>>
> Hi Sekhar,
> 
> no_regulator_off_init is needed for eMMC detection on omap4 platforms.

Okay, and the code currently does:

	if (of_find_property(np, "non-removable", NULL)) {
		pdata->slots[0].nonremovable = true;
		pdata->slots[0].no_regulator_off_init = true;
	}

Is there anything else that needs to be done?

Thanks,
Sekhar

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH 0/3] mmc: omap_hsmmc: get rid of ti,non-removable

[Tony Lindgren]

* Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@ti.com> [130916 05:33]:
> On Friday 13 September 2013 09:07 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@ti.com> [130913 03:18]:
> >> Get rid of TI specific binding ti,non-removable in favour of the
> >> generic binding present for the same purpose.
> > 
> > Looks like there's a different handling in the MMC driver
> > for no_regulator_off_init that's needed for eMMC. That needs to
> > be sorted out and tested first.
> 
> Okay. I couldn't really get the eMMC on my board to detect, but
> apparently Koen has been able to get it to work. I am not really deep
> into details of HSMMC driver so will check with Balaji on what needs to
> be done here.

I think the issue is that until we have a SCM driver module setting
up the PBIAS register as a regulator, eMMC cards won't work without
ti,non-removable.
 
> >> This patch set does not support the old binding anymore. So, yes,
> >> it does introduce an ABI breakage. IMHO, it is not really worth
> >> supporting both bindings ATM since DT-usage in OMAP is still very
> >> nascent and almost always DTB and uImage are upgraded together.
> > 
> > The old bindings must be supported. It's not like we can just drop
> > them. We should just keep the old binding and parse it the same way
> > as the generic binding. That's a minimal amount of code.
> 
> Yes, its minimal amount of code but its code that will very likely never
> get exercised in future because of the reasons I mentioned above. I fear
> in time we will accumulate a lot of unused code this way.

Hey it's an ABI :)
 
> Anyway, since you don't feel its okay to remove the old binding, I will
> go ahead and mark the old binding as deprecated. But perhaps we can
> come-up with some time frame within which users of old .dtb can upgrade
> their .dtb or consider never upgrading to a newer kernel? This sounds
> eerily similar to feature-removal-schedule.txt and yeah I am aware of
> what happened to that. But I still put it here since this problem of DTB
> compatibility is not going to go away.

But before doing that, we first must fix the issue for still
needing ti,non-removable.
 
> One thing that might help is a kernel configuration that does not
> support deprecated bindings so users of old dtbs can actually see what
> deprecated bindings they are using. This way they can probably plan for
> a dtb upgrade better. So in driver you would do something like:
> 
> 	if (of_support_deprecated_bindings() &&
> 	    of_find_property(np, "ti,non-removable", NULL)) {
> 		.. do something ..
> 	}
> 
> of_support_deprecated_bindings() would return based on a config option.

Hmm yeah maybe that should be discussed separately on the
device tree mailing list.

Regards,

Tony