Re: [PATCHv10 0/5] ARM: remove the sub-node and deprecate supports-highspeed property for dwmmc.
On Wed 2014-08-27 12:11:55, Jaehoon Chung wrote: > Hi, > > On 08/26/2014 07:19 PM, Pavel Machek wrote: > > Hi! > > > Would you elaborate? > > If I have a device like a phone, I may want to put one "slot" inside > phone for basic system, and offer second slot for user expansion > (initially empty). > >>> > >>> if multiple slot is supported, then a mmcqd should be processing for > >>> multiple slots. > >>> It's too inefficient, and affect the whole performance reduction. > >> Sorry, Discard this comment. it means dwmci, not mmcqd. > > > > Well, that's a Linux problem, and for many applications, not even > > problem at all. > > > > Device tree should describe hardware, and hardware can do multiple > > slots per controller, so device tree should describe multiple slots > > per controller. > > > > Now, the configuration may be uncommon, but you are moving from good > > hardware description to bad hardware description. > > Well, i don't think it's bad hardware description. And this policy is > suggested by other mmc developers and maintainers. > At first time, I had also suggested same opinion with yours. > Refer to below.. Well, I disagree with them. They want to modify device tree because of linux limitations. Plus. I guess that sooner or later someone will wire just the slot 1 (not 0) and not match this description. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCHv10 0/5] ARM: remove the sub-node and deprecate supports-highspeed property for dwmmc.
Hi, On 08/26/2014 07:19 PM, Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > Would you elaborate? If I have a device like a phone, I may want to put one "slot" inside phone for basic system, and offer second slot for user expansion (initially empty). >>> >>> if multiple slot is supported, then a mmcqd should be processing for >>> multiple slots. >>> It's too inefficient, and affect the whole performance reduction. >> Sorry, Discard this comment. it means dwmci, not mmcqd. > > Well, that's a Linux problem, and for many applications, not even > problem at all. > > Device tree should describe hardware, and hardware can do multiple > slots per controller, so device tree should describe multiple slots > per controller. > > Now, the configuration may be uncommon, but you are moving from good > hardware description to bad hardware description. Well, i don't think it's bad hardware description. And this policy is suggested by other mmc developers and maintainers. At first time, I had also suggested same opinion with yours. Refer to below.. https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/4276481/ Best Regards, Jaehoon Chung > > Pavel > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCHv10 0/5] ARM: remove the sub-node and deprecate supports-highspeed property for dwmmc.
Hi! > >> Would you elaborate? > >> > >> If I have a device like a phone, I may want to put one "slot" inside > >> phone for basic system, and offer second slot for user expansion > >> (initially empty). > > > > if multiple slot is supported, then a mmcqd should be processing for > > multiple slots. > > It's too inefficient, and affect the whole performance reduction. > Sorry, Discard this comment. it means dwmci, not mmcqd. Well, that's a Linux problem, and for many applications, not even problem at all. Device tree should describe hardware, and hardware can do multiple slots per controller, so device tree should describe multiple slots per controller. Now, the configuration may be uncommon, but you are moving from good hardware description to bad hardware description. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCHv10 0/5] ARM: remove the sub-node and deprecate supports-highspeed property for dwmmc.
On 08/25/2014 09:09 PM, Jaehoon Chung wrote: > On 08/25/2014 08:37 PM, Pavel Machek wrote: >> On Mon 2014-08-25 20:28:21, Jaehoon Chung wrote: >>> On 08/25/2014 08:21 PM, Pavel Machek wrote: On Thu 2014-08-07 16:37:57, Jaehoon Chung wrote: > Since used the mmc_of_parse(), didn't parse the sub-node. > So we can remove the sub-node, because almost SoC used the only one card > per a host. > And supports-highspeed can be replaced with "cap-mmc/sd-highspeed" > property. Would it be better to fix parsing of the device tree, and not to change all the device trees? Someone will want to do two slots sooner or later... >>> >>> First, I had considered that controller can be supported the multiple slot. >>> But MMC maintainers and other people suggested that consider the only one >>> card per a host. >>> Two slots or more don't have any benefit, (power or performance, etc). >> >> Would you elaborate? >> >> If I have a device like a phone, I may want to put one "slot" inside >> phone for basic system, and offer second slot for user expansion >> (initially empty). > > if multiple slot is supported, then a mmcqd should be processing for multiple > slots. > It's too inefficient, and affect the whole performance reduction. Sorry, Discard this comment. it means dwmci, not mmcqd. > > If want to offer the second slot for user expansion, add the host for > expansion slot. > Almost All SoC didn't use the multiple slot per a host controller for > eMMC/SD/SDIO. > > If Some device(Phone) supports the SD-card and eMMC, then there are two Host > IP. > One Host IP is used for eMMC, other is used for SD-card. > > this is H/W design issue. > > a) You means the below, > > One Host IP eMMC > | > SD > | > SDIO > > b) We means the below > One Host IP eMMC > One Host IP SD > One Host IP SDIO > > In now, I knew every SoC have used like b) type. I didn't see a) type > (especially, dwmmc's case). > > If i missed something, let me know, plz. > > Best Regards, > Jaehoon Chung > >> >> Or I may want to have internal slot with a card to boot from and have >> external slot (initially empty) for system update for embedded system. >> >> I see quite an obvious benefit there. >> Pavel >> > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCHv10 0/5] ARM: remove the sub-node and deprecate supports-highspeed property for dwmmc.
On 08/25/2014 08:37 PM, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Mon 2014-08-25 20:28:21, Jaehoon Chung wrote: >> On 08/25/2014 08:21 PM, Pavel Machek wrote: >>> On Thu 2014-08-07 16:37:57, Jaehoon Chung wrote: Since used the mmc_of_parse(), didn't parse the sub-node. So we can remove the sub-node, because almost SoC used the only one card per a host. And supports-highspeed can be replaced with "cap-mmc/sd-highspeed" property. >>> >>> Would it be better to fix parsing of the device tree, and not to >>> change all the device trees? >>> >>> Someone will want to do two slots sooner or later... >>> >> >> First, I had considered that controller can be supported the multiple slot. >> But MMC maintainers and other people suggested that consider the only one >> card per a host. >> Two slots or more don't have any benefit, (power or performance, etc). > > Would you elaborate? > > If I have a device like a phone, I may want to put one "slot" inside > phone for basic system, and offer second slot for user expansion > (initially empty). if multiple slot is supported, then a mmcqd should be processing for multiple slots. It's too inefficient, and affect the whole performance reduction. If want to offer the second slot for user expansion, add the host for expansion slot. Almost All SoC didn't use the multiple slot per a host controller for eMMC/SD/SDIO. If Some device(Phone) supports the SD-card and eMMC, then there are two Host IP. One Host IP is used for eMMC, other is used for SD-card. this is H/W design issue. a) You means the below, One Host IP eMMC | SD | SDIO b) We means the below One Host IP eMMC One Host IP SD One Host IP SDIO In now, I knew every SoC have used like b) type. I didn't see a) type (especially, dwmmc's case). If i missed something, let me know, plz. Best Regards, Jaehoon Chung > > Or I may want to have internal slot with a card to boot from and have > external slot (initially empty) for system update for embedded system. > > I see quite an obvious benefit there. > Pavel > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCHv10 0/5] ARM: remove the sub-node and deprecate supports-highspeed property for dwmmc.
On Mon 2014-08-25 20:28:21, Jaehoon Chung wrote: > On 08/25/2014 08:21 PM, Pavel Machek wrote: > > On Thu 2014-08-07 16:37:57, Jaehoon Chung wrote: > >> Since used the mmc_of_parse(), didn't parse the sub-node. > >> So we can remove the sub-node, because almost SoC used the only one card > >> per a host. > >> And supports-highspeed can be replaced with "cap-mmc/sd-highspeed" > >> property. > > > > Would it be better to fix parsing of the device tree, and not to > > change all the device trees? > > > > Someone will want to do two slots sooner or later... > > > > First, I had considered that controller can be supported the multiple slot. > But MMC maintainers and other people suggested that consider the only one > card per a host. > Two slots or more don't have any benefit, (power or performance, etc). Would you elaborate? If I have a device like a phone, I may want to put one "slot" inside phone for basic system, and offer second slot for user expansion (initially empty). Or I may want to have internal slot with a card to boot from and have external slot (initially empty) for system update for embedded system. I see quite an obvious benefit there. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCHv10 0/5] ARM: remove the sub-node and deprecate supports-highspeed property for dwmmc.
On 08/25/2014 08:21 PM, Pavel Machek wrote: > On Thu 2014-08-07 16:37:57, Jaehoon Chung wrote: >> Since used the mmc_of_parse(), didn't parse the sub-node. >> So we can remove the sub-node, because almost SoC used the only one card per >> a host. >> And supports-highspeed can be replaced with "cap-mmc/sd-highspeed" >> property. > > Would it be better to fix parsing of the device tree, and not to > change all the device trees? > > Someone will want to do two slots sooner or later... > First, I had considered that controller can be supported the multiple slot. But MMC maintainers and other people suggested that consider the only one card per a host. Two slots or more don't have any benefit, (power or performance, etc). Best Regards, Jaehoon Chung -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCHv10 0/5] ARM: remove the sub-node and deprecate supports-highspeed property for dwmmc.
On Thu 2014-08-07 16:37:57, Jaehoon Chung wrote: > Since used the mmc_of_parse(), didn't parse the sub-node. > So we can remove the sub-node, because almost SoC used the only one card per > a host. > And supports-highspeed can be replaced with "cap-mmc/sd-highspeed" >property. Would it be better to fix parsing of the device tree, and not to change all the device trees? Someone will want to do two slots sooner or later... -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[PATCHv10 0/5] ARM: remove the sub-node and deprecate supports-highspeed property for dwmmc.
Since used the mmc_of_parse(), didn't parse the sub-node. So we can remove the sub-node, because almost SoC used the only one card per a host. And supports-highspeed can be replaced with "cap-mmc/sd-highspeed" property. Changelog V10: - Rebased for next. - Remove conflict Changelog V9: - Fix typos. - Relocated the warning message. - Change patch's sequence. Changelog V8: - Add the warning message to notice that slot-node was removed. (As Doug's suggestion) Changelog V7: - Fixed typo and modified the commit message. Changelog V6: - Fixed Wrong bit control for host's quirks and rename. - Add "Acked-by" for each SoC maintainers. Changelog V5: - Rebased on v3.16-rc4. - Add Acked-by. Changelog V4: - Fix the checkpatch error. Changelog V3: - Fix the wrong bus-width value. - Use the slot->host->quirks instead of brq->quirks. - Add tested-by and reviewd-by. Changelog V2: - Add the "mmc: dw_mmc: replace "disable-wp" from slot's quirks to host's quirk" Jaehoon Chung (5): mmc: dw_mmc: Slot quirk "disable-wp" is deprecated. mmc: dw_mmc: modify the dt-binding for removing slot-node and supports-highspeed ARM: dts: exynos: unuse the slot-node and deprecate the supports-highspeed for dw-mmc ARM: dts: socfpga: unuse the slot-node and deprecate the supports-highspeed for dw-mmc ARM: dts: rockchip: unuse the slot-node and deprecate the supports-highspeed for dw-mmc .../devicetree/bindings/mmc/exynos-dw-mshc.txt | 17 - .../devicetree/bindings/mmc/k3-dw-mshc.txt | 12 -- .../devicetree/bindings/mmc/synopsys-dw-mshc.txt | 12 -- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-odroid-common.dtsi|8 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-origen.dts|8 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-trats2.dts|8 ++- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-arndale.dts | 18 -- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-cros-common.dtsi | 25 ++-- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-smdk5250.dts | 18 -- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5250-snow.dts |6 ++--- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5260-xyref5260.dts | 18 -- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5410-smdk5410.dts | 18 -- arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-arndale-octa.dts | 16 - arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-peach-pit.dts | 16 - arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5420-smdk5420.dts | 16 - arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos5800-peach-pi.dts | 16 - arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3066a-bqcurie2.dts | 15 arch/arm/boot/dts/rk3188-radxarock.dts |7 ++ arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_arria5.dtsi |9 +++ arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_cyclone5.dtsi|9 +++ arch/arm/boot/dts/socfpga_vt.dts |9 +++ drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c | 11 +++-- include/linux/mmc/dw_mmc.h |2 ++ 23 files changed, 92 insertions(+), 202 deletions(-) -- 1.7.9.5 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
