On Sun, Apr 29 2018, Christian Lütke-Stetzkamp wrote:

> Currently sdr_get_field is a macro, to bring the code in line with the
> upstream driver mtk-sd, it is changed to a function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Christian Lütke-Stetzkamp <christ...@lkamp.de>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/mt7621-mmc/mt6575_sd.h | 10 +++++-----
>  drivers/staging/mt7621-mmc/sd.c        | 14 ++++++++------
>  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/mt7621-mmc/mt6575_sd.h 
> b/drivers/staging/mt7621-mmc/mt6575_sd.h
> index 90b4ee6b396b..195c7333f77d 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/mt7621-mmc/mt6575_sd.h
> +++ b/drivers/staging/mt7621-mmc/mt6575_sd.h
> @@ -980,10 +980,10 @@ static inline void sdr_set_field(void __iomem *reg, u32 
> field, u32 val)
>       writel(tv, reg);
>  }
>  
> -#define sdr_get_field(reg, field, val)                                       
> \
> -do {                                                         \
> -     volatile unsigned int tv = sdr_read32(reg);                     \
> -     val = ((tv & (field)) >> (ffs((unsigned int)field) - 1));       \
> -} while (0)
> +static inline void sdr_get_field(void __iomem *reg, u32 field, u32 *val)
> +{
> +     unsigned int tv = readl(reg);
> +     *val = ((tv & field) >> (ffs((unsigned int)field) - 1));
> +}

Converting this to a function it good, but it should return val rather
than set *val.


>  
>  #endif
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/mt7621-mmc/sd.c b/drivers/staging/mt7621-mmc/sd.c
> index 00dacf8c9625..f4da48a5772b 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/mt7621-mmc/sd.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/mt7621-mmc/sd.c
> @@ -1577,8 +1577,8 @@ static int msdc_tune_cmdrsp(struct msdc_host *host, 
> struct mmc_command *cmd)
>          ==========================*/
>  
>       // save the previous tune result
> -     sdr_get_field(MSDC_IOCON,    MSDC_IOCON_RSPL,        orig_rsmpl);
> -     sdr_get_field(MSDC_PAD_TUNE, MSDC_PAD_TUNE_CMDRRDLY, orig_rrdly);
> +     sdr_get_field(MSDC_IOCON,    MSDC_IOCON_RSPL,        &orig_rsmpl);
> +     sdr_get_field(MSDC_PAD_TUNE, MSDC_PAD_TUNE_CMDRRDLY, &orig_rrdly);

So this becomes

> +     orig_rsmpl = sdr_get_field(MSDC_IOCON,    MSDC_IOCON_RSPL);
> +     orig_rrdly = sdr_get_field(MSDC_PAD_TUNE, MSDC_PAD_TUNE_CMDRRDLY);

which is much easier to understand at first glance.

Thanks,
NeilBrown


>  
>       rrdly = 0;
>       do {
> @@ -1640,7 +1640,7 @@ static int msdc_tune_bread(struct mmc_host *mmc, struct 
> mmc_request *mrq)
>       int result = -1;
>       u32 skip = 1;
>  
> -     sdr_get_field(MSDC_IOCON, MSDC_IOCON_DSPL, orig_dsmpl);
> +     sdr_get_field(MSDC_IOCON, MSDC_IOCON_DSPL, &orig_dsmpl);
>  
>       /* Tune Method 2. */
>       sdr_set_field(MSDC_IOCON, MSDC_IOCON_DDLSEL, 1);
> @@ -1664,7 +1664,9 @@ static int msdc_tune_bread(struct mmc_host *mmc, struct 
> mmc_request *mrq)
>                       }
>                       result = msdc_do_request(mmc, mrq);
>  
> -                     sdr_get_field(SDC_DCRC_STS, SDC_DCRC_STS_POS | 
> SDC_DCRC_STS_NEG, dcrc); /* RO */
> +                     sdr_get_field(SDC_DCRC_STS,
> +                                   SDC_DCRC_STS_POS | SDC_DCRC_STS_NEG,
> +                                   &dcrc); /* RO */
>                       if (!ddr)
>                               dcrc &= ~SDC_DCRC_STS_NEG;
>                       ERR_MSG("TUNE_BREAD<%s> dcrc<0x%x> 
> DATRDDLY0/1<0x%x><0x%x> dsmpl<0x%x>",
> @@ -1751,8 +1753,8 @@ static int msdc_tune_bwrite(struct mmc_host *mmc, 
> struct mmc_request *mrq)
>  
>       // MSDC_IOCON_DDR50CKD need to check. [Fix me]
>  
> -     sdr_get_field(MSDC_PAD_TUNE, MSDC_PAD_TUNE_DATWRDLY, orig_wrrdly);
> -     sdr_get_field(MSDC_IOCON,    MSDC_IOCON_DSPL,        orig_dsmpl);
> +     sdr_get_field(MSDC_PAD_TUNE, MSDC_PAD_TUNE_DATWRDLY, &orig_wrrdly);
> +     sdr_get_field(MSDC_IOCON,    MSDC_IOCON_DSPL,        &orig_dsmpl);
>  
>       /* Tune Method 2. just DAT0 */
>       sdr_set_field(MSDC_IOCON, MSDC_IOCON_DDLSEL, 1);
> -- 
> 2.16.1

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel

Reply via email to