Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] mmc: omap_hsmmc: Convert hsmmc driver to use device tree

[Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com>]

On Friday 24 February 2012 06:21 PM, Cousson, Benoit wrote:
> On 2/24/2012 12:35 PM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
>> On Friday 24 February 2012 05:02 PM, T Krishnamoorthy, Balaji wrote:
>>> On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 5:31 PM, Rajendra Nayak<rnayak@ti.com> wrote:
>>>> Define dt bindings for the ti-omap-hsmmc, and adapt
>>>> the driver to extract data (which was earlier passed as
>>>> platform_data) from device tree.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak<rnayak@ti.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> .../devicetree/bindings/mmc/ti-omap-hsmmc.txt | 31 +++++++++
>>>> drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c | 68 ++++++++++++++++++++
>>>> 2 files changed, 99 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>> create mode 100644
>>>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/ti-omap-hsmmc.txt
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/ti-omap-hsmmc.txt
>>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/ti-omap-hsmmc.txt
>>>> new file mode 100644
>>>> index 0000000..e4fa8f0
>>>> --- /dev/null
>>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mmc/ti-omap-hsmmc.txt
>>>> @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@
>>>> +* TI Highspeed MMC host controller for OMAP
>>>> +
>>>> +The Highspeed MMC Host Controller on TI OMAP family
>>>> +provides an interface for MMC, SD, and SDIO types of memory cards.
>>>> +
>>>> +Required properties:
>>>> +- compatible:
>>>> + Should be "ti,omap2-hsmmc", for OMAP2/3 controllers
>>>
>>> omap_hsmmc is applicable for omap2430 and omap3.
>>> omap2420 has non high speed controller mmci-omap -
>>> drivers/mmc/host/omap.c
>>> May be omap3-hsmmc compatible with omap2430 ?
>>
>> Agree. I think its best in that case for me to define a
>> compatible "ti,omap2430-hsmmc" for omap2430 and "ti,omap3-hsmmc"
>> for omap3. Though the IP blocks are same, I cant think of some
>> common compatible string without causing confusion.
>
> It depends, can we detect that using HW revision?

We don't need to. The driver does not do anything different for
2430 or omap3.

> In that case, there is no need to differentiate again with compatible.

Thats perfectly fine. But what *common* compatible string would you
use?

>
> Regards,
> Benoit
>
>>
>>>
>>>> + Should be "ti,omap4-hsmmc", for OMAP4 controllers
>>>> +- ti,hwmods: Must be "mmc<n>", n is controller instance starting 1
>>>> +- reg : should contain hsmmc registers location and length
>>>> +
>>>> +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,bus-width: Number of data lines, default assumed is 1 if the
>>>> property is missing.
>>>> +cd-gpios: GPIOs for card detection
>>>> +wp-gpios: GPIOs for write protection
>>>> +ti,non-removable: non-removable slot (like eMMC)
>>>> +
>>>> +Example:
>>>> + mmc1: mmc@0x4809c000 {
>>>> + compatible = "ti,omap4-hsmmc";
>>>> + reg =<0x4809c000 0x400>;
>>>> + ti,hwmods = "mmc1";
>>>> + ti,dual-volt;
>>>> + ti,bus-width =<4>;
>>>> + vmmc-supply =<&vmmc>; /* phandle to regulator node */
>>>> + ti,non-removable;
>>>> + };
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> devicetree-discuss mailing list
>> devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org
>> https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
>