Linux MultiMedia Card development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Judith Mendez <jm@ti.com>
To: Andrew Davis <afd@ti.com>, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
	<linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Randolph Sapp <rs@ti.com>, Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/5] mmc: sdhci_am654: Write ITAPDLY for DDR52 timing
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2024 15:58:15 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <fb524ead-0560-44b4-8e49-27618d53d263@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54161b26-329c-4faa-b6f7-73fe82efb525@ti.com>

Hi Andrew,

On 2/1/24 1:36 PM, Andrew Davis wrote:
> On 1/31/24 3:50 PM, Judith Mendez wrote:
>> For DDR52 timing, DLL is enabled but tuning is not carried
>> out, therefore the ITAPDLY value in PHY CTRL 4 register is
>> not correct. Fix this by writing ITAPDLY after enabling DLL.
>>
>> Fixes: a161c45f2979 ("mmc: sdhci_am654: Enable DLL only for some speed 
>> modes")
>> Signed-off-by: Judith Mendez <jm@ti.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_am654.c | 27 +++++++++++++++------------
>>   1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_am654.c 
>> b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_am654.c
>> index a3798c9912f6..ff18a274b6f2 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_am654.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci_am654.c
>> @@ -170,7 +170,19 @@ struct sdhci_am654_driver_data {
>>   #define DLL_CALIB    (1 << 4)
>>   };
>> -static void sdhci_am654_setup_dll(struct sdhci_host *host, unsigned 
>> int clock)
>> +static void sdhci_am654_write_itapdly(struct sdhci_am654_data 
>> *sdhci_am654,
>> +                      u32 itapdly)
> 
> This patch is confusing, looks like you switched the place of these two
> functions, but diff is not really liking that. You can mess with
> --diff-algorithm and the like to get a more readable patch. But in
> this case why switch their spots at all?
> 
> Seems to be so you can call sdhci_am654_write_itapdly() from
> sdhci_am654_setup_dll() without a forward declaration, instead
> why not just call sdhci_am654_write_itapdly() after calling
> sdhci_am654_setup_dll() below. That also saves to from having
> to pass in `timing` to sdhci_am654_write_itapdly() just to
> have it pass it right through to sdhci_am654_setup_dll().

Really the only reason I did this is because we call
sdhci_am654_write_itapdly() in sdhci_am654_setup_delay_chain and
I wanted to keep the flow for setting up DLL the same.
I agree the patch looks confusing, so I will fix this for v2.

~ Judith

> Andrew
> 
>> +{
>> +    /* Set ITAPCHGWIN before writing to ITAPDLY */
>> +    regmap_update_bits(sdhci_am654->base, PHY_CTRL4, ITAPCHGWIN_MASK,
>> +               0x1 << ITAPCHGWIN_SHIFT);
>> +    regmap_update_bits(sdhci_am654->base, PHY_CTRL4, ITAPDLYSEL_MASK,
>> +               itapdly << ITAPDLYSEL_SHIFT);
>> +    regmap_update_bits(sdhci_am654->base, PHY_CTRL4, ITAPCHGWIN_MASK, 
>> 0);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void sdhci_am654_setup_dll(struct sdhci_host *host, unsigned 
>> int clock,
>> +                  unsigned char timing)
>>   {
>>       struct sdhci_pltfm_host *pltfm_host = sdhci_priv(host);
>>       struct sdhci_am654_data *sdhci_am654 = 
>> sdhci_pltfm_priv(pltfm_host);
>> @@ -236,17 +248,8 @@ static void sdhci_am654_setup_dll(struct 
>> sdhci_host *host, unsigned int clock)
>>           dev_err(mmc_dev(host->mmc), "DLL failed to relock\n");
>>           return;
>>       }
>> -}
>> -static void sdhci_am654_write_itapdly(struct sdhci_am654_data 
>> *sdhci_am654,
>> -                      u32 itapdly)
>> -{
>> -    /* Set ITAPCHGWIN before writing to ITAPDLY */
>> -    regmap_update_bits(sdhci_am654->base, PHY_CTRL4, ITAPCHGWIN_MASK,
>> -               1 << ITAPCHGWIN_SHIFT);
>> -    regmap_update_bits(sdhci_am654->base, PHY_CTRL4, ITAPDLYSEL_MASK,
>> -               itapdly << ITAPDLYSEL_SHIFT);
>> -    regmap_update_bits(sdhci_am654->base, PHY_CTRL4, ITAPCHGWIN_MASK, 
>> 0);
>> +    sdhci_am654_write_itapdly(sdhci_am654, 
>> sdhci_am654->itap_del_sel[timing]);
>>   }
>>   static void sdhci_am654_setup_delay_chain(struct sdhci_am654_data 
>> *sdhci_am654,
>> @@ -298,7 +301,7 @@ static void sdhci_am654_set_clock(struct 
>> sdhci_host *host, unsigned int clock)
>>       regmap_update_bits(sdhci_am654->base, PHY_CTRL4, mask, val);
>>       if (timing > MMC_TIMING_UHS_SDR25 && clock >= CLOCK_TOO_SLOW_HZ) {
>> -        sdhci_am654_setup_dll(host, clock);
>> +        sdhci_am654_setup_dll(host, clock, timing);
>>           sdhci_am654->dll_enable = true;
>>       } else {
>>           sdhci_am654_setup_delay_chain(sdhci_am654, timing);


  reply	other threads:[~2024-02-06 21:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-01-31 21:50 [PATCH v1 0/5] Add tuning algorithm for delay chain Judith Mendez
2024-01-31 21:50 ` [PATCH v1 1/5] mmc: sdhci_am654: " Judith Mendez
2024-02-01 19:24   ` Andrew Davis
2024-01-31 21:50 ` [PATCH v1 2/5] mmc: sdhci_am654: Write ITAPDLY for DDR52 timing Judith Mendez
2024-02-01 19:36   ` Andrew Davis
2024-02-06 21:58     ` Judith Mendez [this message]
2024-02-06 22:10       ` Judith Mendez
2024-01-31 21:50 ` [PATCH v1 3/5] mmc: sdhci_am654: Add missing OTAP/ITAP enable Judith Mendez
2024-02-01 19:46   ` Andrew Davis
2024-02-06 22:00     ` Judith Mendez
2024-02-06 22:16       ` Andrew Davis
2024-01-31 21:50 ` [PATCH v1 4/5] mmc: sdhci_am654: Add ITAPDLYSEL in sdhci_j721e_4bit_set_clock Judith Mendez
2024-02-01 19:57   ` Andrew Davis
2024-02-01 21:52     ` Judith Mendez
2024-02-02  4:42     ` Vignesh Raghavendra
2024-01-31 21:50 ` [PATCH v1 5/5] mmc: sdhci_am654: Fix ITAPDLY for HS400 timing Judith Mendez

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=fb524ead-0560-44b4-8e49-27618d53d263@ti.com \
    --to=jm@ti.com \
    --cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
    --cc=afd@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rs@ti.com \
    --cc=ulf.hansson@linaro.org \
    --cc=vigneshr@ti.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox