mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Philip Rakity <prakity@nvidia.com>
To: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List"
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>,
	Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lrg@ti.com>, Chris Ball <cjb@laptop.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mmc: sdhci: apply voltage range check only for non-fixed regulators
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 22:23:17 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <DB83372B-7C12-4670-8C46-207C4A56F8BD@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <877gppmvyd.fsf@octavius.laptop.org>


Hi Marek,

Is the regulator dedicated ?  or is it shared ?   Is it used for eMMC ?

If it cannot be turned off -- then just don't list it in the regulators list for vmmc.  

If it CAN be turned off then need to get back to you.

Philip 

On Nov 13, 2012, at 2:14 PM, Chris Ball <cjb@laptop.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Nov 13 2012, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 13 2012, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
>>>> Fixed regulators cannot change their voltage, so disable all voltage
>>>> range checking for them, otherwise the driver fails to operate with
>>>> fixed regulators. Up to now it worked only by luck, because
>>>> regulator_is_supported_voltage() function returned incorrect values.
>>>> Commit "regulator: fix voltage check in regulator_is_supported_voltage()"
>>>> fixed that function and now additional check is needed for fixed
>>>> regulators.
>>>> 
>>>> Signed-off-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c |    2 +-
>>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>> 
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c
>>>> index c7851c0..6f6534e 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c
>>>> @@ -2923,7 +2923,7 @@ int sdhci_add_host(struct sdhci_host *host)
>>>> 		regulator_enable(host->vmmc);
>>>> 
>>>> #ifdef CONFIG_REGULATOR
>>>> -	if (host->vmmc) {
>>>> +	if (host->vmmc && regulator_count_voltages(host->vmmc) > 1) {
>>>> 		ret = regulator_is_supported_voltage(host->vmmc, 3300000,
>>>> 			3300000);
>>>> 		if ((ret <= 0) || (!(caps[0] & SDHCI_CAN_VDD_330)))
>>> 
>>> Thanks for the longer explanation.  I'm still missing something, though;
>>> what's wrong with running the check as it was with the new regulator code?
>>> (I haven't tried it yet.)
>>> 
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_REGULATOR
>>>         if (host->vmmc) {
>>>                 ret = regulator_is_supported_voltage(host->vmmc, 3300000,
>>>                         3300000);
>>>                 if ((ret <= 0) || (!(caps[0] & SDHCI_CAN_VDD_330)))
>>>                         caps[0] &= ~SDHCI_CAN_VDD_330;
>>>                 ret = regulator_is_supported_voltage(host->vmmc, 3000000,
>>>                         3000000);
>>>                 if ((ret <= 0) || (!(caps[0] & SDHCI_CAN_VDD_300)))
>>>                         caps[0] &= ~SDHCI_CAN_VDD_300;
>>>                 ret = regulator_is_supported_voltage(host->vmmc, 1800000,
>>>                         1800000);
>>>                 if ((ret <= 0) || (!(caps[0] & SDHCI_CAN_VDD_180)))
>>>                         caps[0] &= ~SDHCI_CAN_VDD_180;
>>>         }
>>> #endif /* CONFIG_REGULATOR */
>>> 
>>> The point is to remove unsupported voltages, so if someone sets up a
>>> fixed regulator at 3300000, all of the other caps are disabled.  Why
>>> wouldn't that work without this change, and how are we supposed to
>>> remove those caps on a fixed regulator after your patchset?
>>> 
>>> Thanks, sorry if I'm missing something obvious,
>> 
>> On our boards eMMC is connected to fixed 2.8V regulator, what results in
>> clearing all available voltages and fail. The same situation is when one
>> enable dummy regulator and try to use sdhci with it. My patch fixes this
>> and restores sdhci to working state as it was before (before fixing
>> regulator regulator_is_supported_voltage() function and earlier when
>> MMC_BROKEN_VOLATGE capability was used).
> 
> I see.  Sounds like a separate bug -- Philip (or anyone else), any
> idea how we should be treating eMMCs with a fixed voltage here?
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> - Chris.
> -- 
> Chris Ball   <cjb@laptop.org>   <http://printf.net/>
> One Laptop Per Child


  reply	other threads:[~2012-11-13 21:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-11-13  8:48 [PATCH 0/3] Fix fixed regulators support Marek Szyprowski
2012-11-13  8:48 ` [PATCH 1/3] regulator: fix voltage check in regulator_is_supported_voltage() Marek Szyprowski
2012-11-13  9:01   ` Mark Brown
2012-11-13  8:48 ` [PATCH 2/3] regulator: threat regulators with constant volatage as fixed Marek Szyprowski
2012-11-13  9:00   ` Mark Brown
2012-11-13  9:35     ` [PATCH v2] regulator: treat " Marek Szyprowski
2012-11-13  9:42       ` Mark Brown
2012-11-13  9:49         ` [PATCH v3] " Marek Szyprowski
2012-11-14  2:01           ` Mark Brown
2012-11-20 13:20             ` Marek Szyprowski
2012-11-13  8:48 ` [PATCH 3/3] mmc: sdhci: apply voltage range check only for non-fixed regulators Marek Szyprowski
2012-11-13 12:45   ` Chris Ball
2012-11-13 13:32     ` [PATCH v2] " Marek Szyprowski
2012-11-13 13:45       ` Chris Ball
2012-11-13 14:09         ` Marek Szyprowski
2012-11-13 14:14           ` Chris Ball
2012-11-13 21:23             ` Philip Rakity [this message]
2012-11-20  8:42               ` Marek Szyprowski
2012-11-14  1:10     ` [PATCH 3/3] " Mark Brown
     [not found] <25B60CDC2F704E4E9D88FFD52780CB4C060FBEA29A@SC-VEXCH1.marvell.com>
2012-11-14  7:11 ` FW: [PATCH v2] " Kevin Liu
2012-11-14  7:28   ` Mark Brown
2012-11-14  8:36     ` Kevin Liu
2012-11-14  8:41       ` Mark Brown
2012-11-14  8:57         ` Kevin Liu
2012-11-14  9:08           ` Philip Rakity
2012-11-14 12:05             ` Kevin Liu

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=DB83372B-7C12-4670-8C46-207C4A56F8BD@nvidia.com \
    --to=prakity@nvidia.com \
    --cc=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
    --cc=cjb@laptop.org \
    --cc=kyungmin.park@samsung.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lrg@ti.com \
    --cc=m.szyprowski@samsung.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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®