On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 02:33:00PM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> The driver filled in the clk and clock fields in struct
> sdhci_pltfm_host, but they are unused in the sdhci-pltfm
> code and only ever used it for internal use. This adds
> a field f_max to private data and uses it instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sascha Hauer <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc-imx.c | 18 +++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc-imx.c
> b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc-imx.c
> index b841bb7..d530820 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc-imx.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-esdhc-imx.c
> @@ -152,6 +152,7 @@ struct pltfm_imx_data {
> struct pinctrl_state *pins_200mhz;
> const struct esdhc_soc_data *socdata;
> struct esdhc_platform_data boarddata;
> + unsigned long f_max;
> struct clk *clk_ipg;
> struct clk *clk_ahb;
> struct clk *clk_per;
> @@ -574,19 +575,16 @@ static unsigned int esdhc_pltfm_get_max_clock(struct
> sdhci_host *host)
> {
> struct sdhci_pltfm_host *pltfm_host = sdhci_priv(host);
> struct pltfm_imx_data *imx_data = pltfm_host->priv;
> - struct esdhc_platform_data *boarddata = &imx_data->boarddata;
>
> - if (boarddata->f_max && (boarddata->f_max < pltfm_host->clock))
> - return boarddata->f_max;
> - else
> - return pltfm_host->clock;
> + return imx_data->f_max;
> }
>
> static unsigned int esdhc_pltfm_get_min_clock(struct sdhci_host *host)
> {
> struct sdhci_pltfm_host *pltfm_host = sdhci_priv(host);
> + struct pltfm_imx_data *imx_data = pltfm_host->priv;
>
> - return pltfm_host->clock / 256 / 16;
> + return imx_data->f_max / 256 / 16;
> }
>
> static inline void esdhc_pltfm_set_clock(struct sdhci_host *host,
> @@ -594,7 +592,7 @@ static inline void esdhc_pltfm_set_clock(struct
> sdhci_host *host,
> {
> struct sdhci_pltfm_host *pltfm_host = sdhci_priv(host);
> struct pltfm_imx_data *imx_data = pltfm_host->priv;
> - unsigned int host_clock = pltfm_host->clock;
> + unsigned int host_clock = clk_get_rate(imx_data->clk_per);
Will this bring the issue that commit a974862faee1 (mmc: sdhci-esdhc-imx:
fix access hardirq-unsafe lock in atomic context) fixed back to us?
Shawn
> int pre_div = 2;
> int div = 1;
> u32 temp, val;
> @@ -994,8 +992,6 @@ static int sdhci_esdhc_imx_probe(struct platform_device
> *pdev)
> goto free_sdhci;
> }
>
> - pltfm_host->clk = imx_data->clk_per;
> - pltfm_host->clock = clk_get_rate(pltfm_host->clk);
> clk_prepare_enable(imx_data->clk_per);
> clk_prepare_enable(imx_data->clk_ipg);
> clk_prepare_enable(imx_data->clk_ahb);
> @@ -1051,6 +1047,10 @@ static int sdhci_esdhc_imx_probe(struct
> platform_device *pdev)
> host->mmc->parent->platform_data);
> }
>
> + imx_data->f_max = clk_get_rate(imx_data->clk_per);
> + if (boarddata->f_max && boarddata->f_max < imx_data->f_max)
> + imx_data->f_max = boarddata->f_max;
> +
> /* write_protect */
> if (boarddata->wp_type == ESDHC_WP_GPIO) {
> err = mmc_gpio_request_ro(host->mmc, boarddata->wp_gpio);
> --
> 2.0.0.rc0
>
--
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
