Re: [RESEND PATCHv1 0/8] mmc: sdhci-msm: Provide support for enhanced strobe

[Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@codeaurora.org>]

On 1/20/2017 2:23 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On 10 January 2017 at 08:00, Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Resending this patch series, as no one could review it -possibly due to
>> holidays during that time.
>>
>> This patch series mainly provides enhanced strobe support to sdhci-msm driver
>> along with some additions of HW recommended sequence. This has been tested on
>> 8996 based internal target & on db410c.
>>
>> Patches 1-3 :- Factors out few functions to be re-used again.
>>                To also simplify large functions and makes it more readable.
>>
>> Patches 4-5 :- Few recommendations based on HW prog. guide.
>>
>> Patches 6 :- Clear SDHCI_HS400_TUNING flag after platform_execute_tuning
>>              so that ->platform_execute_tuning (underlying platform driver) can
>>              know about HS400 tuning.
>>
>> Patch 7 :- Implements an additional step as per HPG for HS400 tuning.
>>
>> Patch 8 :- Implements enhanced strobe functionality in sdhci-msm driver.
>>
>>
>> Ritesh Harjani (6):
>>   mmc: sdhci-msm: Factor out sdhci_msm_hc_select_mode
>>   mmc: sdhci-msm: Factor out function to set/get msm clock rate
>>   mmc: sdhci-msm: Factor out sdhci_msm_hs400
>>   mmc: sdhci: Clear SDHCI_HS400_TUNING flag after
>>     platform_execute_tuning
>>   mmc: sdhci-msm: Make HS400 tuning follow as per recommeneded HW
>>     sequence
>>   mmc: sdhci-msm: Provide enhanced_strobe mode feature support
>>
>> Subhash Jadavani (1):
>>   mmc: sdhci-msm: configure CORE_CSR_CDC_DELAY_CFG to recommended value
>>
>> Venkat Gopalakrishnan (1):
>>   mmc: sdhci-msm: Reset vendor specific func register on probe
>>
>>  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c | 356 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
>>  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c     |   6 +-
>>  2 files changed, 224 insertions(+), 138 deletions(-)
>>
>> --
>> The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
>> a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project.
>>
>
> Ritesh, Adrian,
>
> I realized that Adrian requested a minor fixup of patch6. However to
> simplify a bit for all of us, avoiding another new version of the
> series being sent I decided to pick this series as is.
Thanks Ulf.

>
> Adrian, I even took the liberty of adding your ack for patch6. I also
> trust Ritesh to make a fix for patch6, but on top of the series I have
> just applied.
Thanks :)


>
> If you have any objections, please tell me!
No objections as such. But I wanted to clear few things here.

Based on Adrian comments for patch6 - I think since anyway I will hook 
sdhci-msm to host->mmc_host_ops.execute_tuning (which will call 
->sdhci_msm_execute_tuning directly and play with SDHCI_HS400_TUNING 
inside sdhci_msm_execute_tuning function), I assumed we need to drop 
path6 (which plays with SDHCI_HS400_TUNING flag inside 
sdhci_execute_tuning).


@Adrian,
Please let me know if we would anyway like to retain patch6. If yes, I 
can make the changes you mentioned for sdhci-msm on top of this patch 
series.

If not, then instead of reverting path6 again on top of this series, I 
will re-submit a new series with your comments addressed and dropping 
patch6.

Please let me know what suits better.

Regards
Ritesh

>
> Kind regards
> Uffe
>

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project