[PATCH] ricoh_mmc: Handle newer models of Ricoh controllers (resend)

[PATCH] ricoh_mmc: Handle newer models of Ricoh controllers (resend)

[philipl]

The latest generation of laptops are shipping with a newer
model of Ricoh chip where the firewire controller is the
primary PCI function but a cardbus controller is also present.

The existing code assumes that if a cardbus controller is,
present, then it must be the one to manipulate - but the real
rule is that you manipulate PCI function 0. This patch adds an
additional constraint that the target must be function 0.

Signed-off-by: Philip Langdale <philipl@overt.org>
---

  ricoh_mmc.c |   17 +++++++++++------
  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
index a16d760..be9e7b3 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
@@ -11,9 +11,10 @@

 /*
  * This is a conceptually ridiculous driver, but it is required by the way
- * the Ricoh multi-function R5C832 works. This chip implements firewire
- * and four different memory card controllers. Two of those controllers are
- * an SDHCI controller and a proprietary MMC controller. The linux SDHCI
+ * the Ricoh multi-function chips (R5CXXX) work. These chips implement
+ * the four main memory card controllers (SD, MMC, MS, xD) and one or both
+ * of cardbus or firewire. It happens that they implement SD and MMC
+ * support as separate controllers (and PCI functions). The linux SDHCI
  * driver supports MMC cards but the chip detects MMC cards in hardware
  * and directs them to the MMC controller - so the SDHCI driver never sees
  * them. To get around this, we must disable the useless MMC controller.
@@ -21,8 +22,10 @@
  * a detection event occurs immediately, even if the MMC card is already
  * in the reader.
  *
- * The relevant registers live on the firewire function, so this is unavoidably
- * ugly. Such is life.
+ * It seems to be the case that the relevant PCI registers to deactivate the
+ * MMC controller live on PCI function 0, which might be the cardbus controller
+ * or the firewire controller, depending on the particular chip in question. As
+ * such, it makes what this driver has to do unavoidably ugly. Such is life.
  */

 #include <linux/pci.h>
@@ -143,6 +146,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
 		pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_RICOH,
 			PCI_DEVICE_ID_RICOH_RL5C476, fw_dev))) {
 		if (PCI_SLOT(pdev->devfn) == PCI_SLOT(fw_dev->devfn) &&
+		    PCI_FUNC(fw_dev->devfn) == 0 &&
 		    pdev->bus == fw_dev->bus) {
 			if (ricoh_mmc_disable(fw_dev) != 0)
 				return -ENODEV;
@@ -160,6 +164,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
 	    (fw_dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_RICOH,
 					PCI_DEVICE_ID_RICOH_R5C832, fw_dev))) {
 		if (PCI_SLOT(pdev->devfn) == PCI_SLOT(fw_dev->devfn) &&
+		    PCI_FUNC(fw_dev->devfn) == 0 &&
 		    pdev->bus == fw_dev->bus) {
 			if (ricoh_mmc_disable(fw_dev) != 0)
 				return -ENODEV;
@@ -172,7 +177,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,

 	if (!ctrlfound) {
 		printk(KERN_WARNING DRIVER_NAME
-		       ": Main firewire function not found. Cannot disable controller.\n");
+		       ": Main Ricoh function not found. Cannot disable controller.\n");
 		return -ENODEV;
 	}

Re: [PATCH] ricoh_mmc: Handle newer models of Ricoh controllers (resend)

[Andrew Morton]

On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 20:27:50 -0500 (EST) philipl@overt.org wrote:

> The latest generation of laptops are shipping with a newer
> model of Ricoh chip where the firewire controller is the
> primary PCI function but a cardbus controller is also present.
> 
> The existing code assumes that if a cardbus controller is,
> present, then it must be the one to manipulate - but the real
> rule is that you manipulate PCI function 0. This patch adds an
> additional constraint that the target must be function 0.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Philip Langdale <philipl@overt.org>
> ---
> 
>   ricoh_mmc.c |   17 +++++++++++------
>   1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
> index a16d760..be9e7b3 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
> @@ -11,9 +11,10 @@
> 
>  /*
>   * This is a conceptually ridiculous driver, but it is required by the way
> - * the Ricoh multi-function R5C832 works. This chip implements firewire
> - * and four different memory card controllers. Two of those controllers are
> - * an SDHCI controller and a proprietary MMC controller. The linux SDHCI
> + * the Ricoh multi-function chips (R5CXXX) work. These chips implement
> + * the four main memory card controllers (SD, MMC, MS, xD) and one or both
> + * of cardbus or firewire. It happens that they implement SD and MMC
> + * support as separate controllers (and PCI functions). The linux SDHCI
>   * driver supports MMC cards but the chip detects MMC cards in hardware
>   * and directs them to the MMC controller - so the SDHCI driver never sees
>   * them. To get around this, we must disable the useless MMC controller.
> @@ -21,8 +22,10 @@
>   * a detection event occurs immediately, even if the MMC card is already
>   * in the reader.
>   *
> - * The relevant registers live on the firewire function, so this is unavoidably
> - * ugly. Such is life.
> + * It seems to be the case that the relevant PCI registers to deactivate the
> + * MMC controller live on PCI function 0, which might be the cardbus controller
> + * or the firewire controller, depending on the particular chip in question. As
> + * such, it makes what this driver has to do unavoidably ugly. Such is life.
>   */
> 
>  #include <linux/pci.h>

The above two hunks already are in linux-next.

> @@ -143,6 +146,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
>  		pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_RICOH,
>  			PCI_DEVICE_ID_RICOH_RL5C476, fw_dev))) {
>  		if (PCI_SLOT(pdev->devfn) == PCI_SLOT(fw_dev->devfn) &&
> +		    PCI_FUNC(fw_dev->devfn) == 0 &&
>  		    pdev->bus == fw_dev->bus) {
>  			if (ricoh_mmc_disable(fw_dev) != 0)
>  				return -ENODEV;
> @@ -160,6 +164,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
>  	    (fw_dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_RICOH,
>  					PCI_DEVICE_ID_RICOH_R5C832, fw_dev))) {
>  		if (PCI_SLOT(pdev->devfn) == PCI_SLOT(fw_dev->devfn) &&
> +		    PCI_FUNC(fw_dev->devfn) == 0 &&
>  		    pdev->bus == fw_dev->bus) {
>  			if (ricoh_mmc_disable(fw_dev) != 0)
>  				return -ENODEV;
> @@ -172,7 +177,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> 
>  	if (!ctrlfound) {
>  		printk(KERN_WARNING DRIVER_NAME
> -		       ": Main firewire function not found. Cannot disable controller.\n");
> +		       ": Main Ricoh function not found. Cannot disable controller.\n");
>  		return -ENODEV;
>  	}

Those three are not.

Re: [PATCH] ricoh_mmc: Handle newer models of Ricoh controllers (resend)

[Philip Langdale]

Andrew Morton wrote:
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
>> index a16d760..be9e7b3 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
>> @@ -11,9 +11,10 @@
>>
>>  /*
>>   * This is a conceptually ridiculous driver, but it is required by the way
>> - * the Ricoh multi-function R5C832 works. This chip implements firewire
>> - * and four different memory card controllers. Two of those controllers are
>> - * an SDHCI controller and a proprietary MMC controller. The linux SDHCI
>> + * the Ricoh multi-function chips (R5CXXX) work. These chips implement
>> + * the four main memory card controllers (SD, MMC, MS, xD) and one or both
>> + * of cardbus or firewire. It happens that they implement SD and MMC
>> + * support as separate controllers (and PCI functions). The linux SDHCI
>>   * driver supports MMC cards but the chip detects MMC cards in hardware
>>   * and directs them to the MMC controller - so the SDHCI driver never sees
>>   * them. To get around this, we must disable the useless MMC controller.
>> @@ -21,8 +22,10 @@
>>   * a detection event occurs immediately, even if the MMC card is already
>>   * in the reader.
>>   *
>> - * The relevant registers live on the firewire function, so this is unavoidably
>> - * ugly. Such is life.
>> + * It seems to be the case that the relevant PCI registers to deactivate the
>> + * MMC controller live on PCI function 0, which might be the cardbus controller
>> + * or the firewire controller, depending on the particular chip in question. As
>> + * such, it makes what this driver has to do unavoidably ugly. Such is life.
>>   */
>>
>>  #include <linux/pci.h>
> 
> The above two hunks already are in linux-next.
> 
>> @@ -143,6 +146,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
>>  		pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_RICOH,
>>  			PCI_DEVICE_ID_RICOH_RL5C476, fw_dev))) {
>>  		if (PCI_SLOT(pdev->devfn) == PCI_SLOT(fw_dev->devfn) &&
>> +		    PCI_FUNC(fw_dev->devfn) == 0 &&
>>  		    pdev->bus == fw_dev->bus) {
>>  			if (ricoh_mmc_disable(fw_dev) != 0)
>>  				return -ENODEV;
>> @@ -160,6 +164,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
>>  	    (fw_dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_RICOH,
>>  					PCI_DEVICE_ID_RICOH_R5C832, fw_dev))) {
>>  		if (PCI_SLOT(pdev->devfn) == PCI_SLOT(fw_dev->devfn) &&
>> +		    PCI_FUNC(fw_dev->devfn) == 0 &&
>>  		    pdev->bus == fw_dev->bus) {
>>  			if (ricoh_mmc_disable(fw_dev) != 0)
>>  				return -ENODEV;
>> @@ -172,7 +177,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
>>
>>  	if (!ctrlfound) {
>>  		printk(KERN_WARNING DRIVER_NAME
>> -		       ": Main firewire function not found. Cannot disable controller.\n");
>> +		       ": Main Ricoh function not found. Cannot disable controller.\n");
>>  		return -ENODEV;
>>  	}
> 
> Those three are not.
> 

Indeed. Pierre, seems like the patch didn't git-apply properly. It's this way in your
tree too. Did you apply the previous garbled version?

--phil

Re: [PATCH] ricoh_mmc: Handle newer models of Ricoh controllers (resend)

[Pierre Ossman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 563 bytes --]

On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:37:01 -0800
Philip Langdale <philipl@overt.org> wrote:

> 
> Indeed. Pierre, seems like the patch didn't git-apply properly. It's this way in your
> tree too. Did you apply the previous garbled version?
> 

Odd.

Anyway, I've queued up the fixed versions instead. Should be hitting
next in a day or two.

-- 
     -- Pierre Ossman

  WARNING: This correspondence is being monitored by the
  Swedish government. Make sure your server uses encryption
  for SMTP traffic and consider using PGP for end-to-end
  encryption.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]