On 28/05/12 06:32, Philip Rakity wrote:
> 
> 
> I have started looking at this area and I am rather confused.  It seems to me 
> two "dedicated" regulators are required.

It probably pays not to assume too much about regulators.  For example:

Sometimes vccq is always on, so there may be just 1 regulator for vcc.

wl12xx/SDIO is setup with a fake regulator that actually controls
the enable line.

There is a case where power is supplied at a different voltage than
spec'ed i.e. commit 6e8201f57c9359c9c5dc8f9805c15a4392492a10

> One regulator controls VDD (vcc) and this is the regulator called vmmc.  This 
> regulator MAY support the ability to switch voltages and MAY support the 
> ability to be turned on and off.
> The other regulator supports signal voltage (vccq) for UHS and SDXC cards.  
> Currently this is not in sdhci.c (I have a patch for this in preparation).  
> Use of this regulator requires that the VDD regulator be capable of being set 
> to 1.8 or 3.3v and be capable of being turned on/off.  on/off support is 
> needed is the switch to 1.8v signaling fails for any reason.
> 
> 
> 
> On May 27, 2012, at 8:20 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> 
>> Hi Guennadi,
>>
>> On 25 May 2012 17:14, Guennadi Liakhovetski <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Add a function to get a regulator, supplying card's Vdd on a specific host.
>>> If such a regulator is found, the function checks, whether a valid OCR mask
>>> can be obtained from this regulator.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Guennadi Liakhovetski <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> v3: remove bogus attempts to ignore the dummy regulator, drop the check
>>> for whether the regulator can change status, do not assign
>>> MMC_CAP_POWER_OFF_CARD automatically. Thanks to Mark and Magnus for
>>> comments.
>>>
>>>  drivers/mmc/core/core.c  |   17 +++++++++++++++++
>>>  include/linux/mmc/host.h |    6 ++++++
>>>  2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
>>> index 0b6141d..0f92ec0 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
>>> @@ -1013,6 +1013,23 @@ int mmc_regulator_set_ocr(struct mmc_host *mmc,
>>>  }
>>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL(mmc_regulator_set_ocr);
>>>
>>> +struct regulator *mmc_regulator_get_vmmc(struct mmc_host *mmc)
>>> +{
>>> +       struct device *dev = mmc_dev(mmc);
>>> +       struct regulator *supply = devm_regulator_get(dev, "vmmc");
>>> +       int ret;
>>> +
>>> +       if (IS_ERR(supply))
>>> +               return NULL;
>>> +
>>> +       ret = mmc_regulator_get_ocrmask(supply);
>>> +       if (ret > 0)
>>
>> Could we have an "else" were a dev_warn prints some info and as well
>> the "ret" maybe?
>>
>>> +               mmc->ocr_avail = ret;
>>> +
>>> +       return supply;
>>> +}
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(mmc_regulator_get_vmmc);
>>> +
>>>  #endif /* CONFIG_REGULATOR */
>>>
>>>  /*
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/mmc/host.h b/include/linux/mmc/host.h
>>> index 0707d22..368b317 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/mmc/host.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/mmc/host.h
>>> @@ -364,6 +364,7 @@ int mmc_regulator_get_ocrmask(struct regulator *supply);
>>>  int mmc_regulator_set_ocr(struct mmc_host *mmc,
>>>                        struct regulator *supply,
>>>                        unsigned short vdd_bit);
>>> +struct regulator *mmc_regulator_get_vmmc(struct mmc_host *mmc);
>>>  #else
>>>  static inline int mmc_regulator_get_ocrmask(struct regulator *supply)
>>>  {
>>> @@ -376,6 +377,11 @@ static inline int mmc_regulator_set_ocr(struct 
>>> mmc_host *mmc,
>>>  {
>>>        return 0;
>>>  }
>>> +
>>> +static inline struct regulator *mmc_regulator_get_vmmc(struct mmc_host 
>>> *mmc)
>>> +{
>>> +       return NULL;
>>> +}
>>>  #endif
>>>
>>
>> Some follow-up thoughts, if mmc_regulator_get_vmmc is supposed to be
>> used from the host drivers, the mmc_regulator_get_ocrmask function do
>> no longer have to be an exported function, but instead a static
>> function on core.c I suppose this can be fixed in separate patch,
>> where we also add mmc_regulator_get_vmmc for all host drivers?
> 
> 
>  have started looking at this area and I am rather confused.  It seems to me 
> two "dedicated" regulators are required.
> One regulator controls VDD (vcc) and this is the regulator called vmmc.  This 
> regulator MAY support the ability to switch voltages and MAY support the 
> ability to be turned on and off.  The main sdhci.c code needs to check the 
> voltages supported by the regulator against the voltages that the host 
> controller supports and adjust the  mmc capabilities to the common set.  I 
> don't think we do this at the moment.
> 
> The other regulator supports signal voltage (vccq) for UHS and SDXC cards.  
> Currently this is not in sdhci.c (I have a patch for this in preparation).  
> Use of this regulator requires that the vccq regulator be capable of being 
> set to 1.8 or 3.3v and the VDD (vmmc) regulator be capable of being turned 
> on/off.  on/off support is needed is the switch to 1.8v signaling fails for 
> any reason.
> 
> 
> 
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Ulf Hansson
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
>> the body of a message to [email protected]
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> 
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to