Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-brcmstb: Add SDHCI_QUIRK2_BROKEN_64_BIT_DMA

[Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>]

On 08/19/2016 07:05 AM, Jaedon Shin wrote:
> Hi Ulf,
> 
>> On Aug 19, 2016, at 10:44 PM, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 19 August 2016 at 04:25, Jaedon Shin <jaedon.shin@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Alan,
>>>
>>> On Aug 18, 2016, at 11:27 PM, Alan Cooper <alcooperx@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It would be better to make this a MIPS only setting because this issue
>>>> only exists for MIPS chips and some newer ARM chips will support 64
>>>> bit DMA.
>>>> Also, since there's been a general effort to reduce the use QUIRKs,
>>>> you could clear the SDHCI_CAN_64BIT in CAPS1 instead of using the
>>>> QUIRK.
>>>>
>>>> @@ -101,6 +101,9 @@ static int sdhci_brcmstb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>       host->caps1 = sdhci_readl(host, SDHCI_CAPABILITIES_1);
>>>>       host->caps1 &= ~(SDHCI_SUPPORT_SDR50 | SDHCI_SUPPORT_SDR104 |
>>>>                       SDHCI_SUPPORT_DDR50);
>>>> +#if defined(CONFIG_MIPS)
>>>> +       host->caps1 &= ~SDHCI_CAN_64BIT;
>>>> +#endif
>>>>       host->quirks |= SDHCI_QUIRK_MISSING_CAPS |
>>>>               SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_TIMEOUT_VAL;
>>>
>>> It's better to me, but we should use host->cap instead of host->cap1. I will update
>>> patch with your comment.
>>
>> Please, then also send this to the public linux-mmc list.
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Uffe
>>
> 
> I'm sorry I could not add the public linux-mmc list this mail thread, but 
> I have already sent the updated patch with linux-mmc.
> 
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9289189/

Humm, is not this one of these cases where we would expect the
compatible string to dictacte whether enabling 64_BIT_DMA makes sense or
not?

The patch is technically correct though.
-- 
Florian