Hi, On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Tom Warren <twarren.nvi...@gmail.com> wrote: > Stephen, > > On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 1:03 PM, Stephen Warren <swar...@wwwdotorg.org> wrote: >> On 02/04/2013 04:48 PM, Tom Warren wrote: >>> tegra_mmc_init() now uses DT info for bus width, WP/CD GPIOs, etc. >>> Tested on Seaboard, fully functional. >> >>> diff --git a/board/compal/paz00/paz00.c b/board/compal/paz00/paz00.c >>> index 1447f47..5cee91a 100644 >>> --- a/board/compal/paz00/paz00.c >>> +++ b/board/compal/paz00/paz00.c >>> @@ -55,18 +55,18 @@ static void pin_mux_mmc(void) >>> /* this is a weak define that we are overriding */ >>> int board_mmc_init(bd_t *bd) >>> { >>> - debug("board_mmc_init called\n"); >>> + debug("%s called\n", __func__); >>> >>> /* Enable muxes, etc. for SDMMC controllers */ >>> pin_mux_mmc(); >>> >>> - debug("board_mmc_init: init eMMC\n"); >>> - /* init dev 0, eMMC chip, with 8-bit bus */ >>> - tegra_mmc_init(0, 8, -1, -1); >>> + debug("%s: init eMMC\n", __func__); >>> + /* init dev 0, eMMC chip */ >>> + tegra_mmc_init(0); >>> >>> - debug("board_mmc_init: init SD slot\n"); >>> - /* init dev 3, SD slot, with 4-bit bus */ >>> - tegra_mmc_init(3, 4, GPIO_PV1, GPIO_PV5); >>> + debug("%s: init SD slot\n", __func__); >>> + /* init dev 3, SD slot */ >>> + tegra_mmc_init(3); >>> >>> return 0; >>> } >> >> That doesn't look right. The board code still has knowledge of which >> SDHCI controllers are in use by the board. Instead, the board should >> just call tegra_mmc_init() with no parameters at all, and the MMC driver >> should scan the device tree for all present-and-enabled SDHCI nodes, and >> instantiate a U-Boot SDHCI device. Without this, the device tree isn't >> in control of the whole process, so there's little point doing the >> conversion; a new board couldn't be supported /just/ by creating a new >> device tree file. >> >>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/tegra_mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/tegra_mmc.c >> >>> +#ifndef CONFIG_OF_CONTROL >>> +#error "Please enable device tree support to use this driver" >>> +#endif >> >> So CONFIG_OF_CONTROL must be enabled ... >> >>> >>> static void tegra_get_setup(struct mmc_host *host, int dev_index) >>> { >>> - debug("tegra_get_setup: dev_index = %d\n", dev_index); >>> + debug("%s: dev_index = %d\n", __func__, dev_index); >>> + >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_CONTROL >> >> ... so there's no need for that ifdef > > I took Allen's recent SPI/SLINK driver(s) as an example, but as you > point out, if CONFIG_OF_CONTROL isn't enabled, you get build errors > anyway. > >> >>> + int count, node = 0; >>> + int node_list[MAX_HOSTS]; >>> + >>> + count = fdtdec_find_aliases_for_id(gd->fdt_blob, "sdmmc", >>> + COMPAT_NVIDIA_TEGRA20_SDMMC, node_list, MAX_HOSTS); >>> + debug("%s: count of nodes is %d\n", __func__, count); >>> + >>> + if (count < dev_index) { >>> + printf("%s: device index %d exceeds node count (%d)!\n", >>> + __func__, dev_index, count); >>> + return; >>> + } >> >> This requires that an alias exist in order for the SDHCI node to be >> found/processed. This isn't correct; the SDHCI nodes must be enumerated >> themselves, and then the aliases (if any are present) provide a naming >> hint for them, but even without aliases, the SDHCI nodes must be processed. > Again, I used Allen's SLINK driver for as a template here. In fact, it > looks like our I2C and SPI/SLINK drivers do this, as well as the > Exynos SPI and S3C24x0 I2C driver all do this. Can you point out a > U-Boot driver that does it the right way (preferably with more than 1 > node, like MMC)? I can take a look at that code to use as an example > of what you're proposing above.
You have it correct already. Stephen please take another look and let me know what problem you see with this approach. I'm very sorry that I am so late to this discussion. >> >>> + /* >>> + * NOTE: mmc->bus_width is determined by mmc.c dynamically. >>> + * Should we override it with this value? >>> + */ >>> + host->width = fdtdec_get_int(gd->fdt_blob, node, "bus-width", 0); >>> + if (!host->width) >>> + debug("%s: no sdmmc width found\n", __func__); >> >> It should be possible to inform the MMC core of the width of the bus in >> terms of wires on the PCB. It should only probe the connected device up >> to that width. If that feature is missing, it can be added later though, >> outside the scope of this patch set. >> >> You didn't Cc the MMC maintainer; they should be Cc'd since this code is >> in drivers/mmc/. > > Thanks, added Andy Fleming to CC. > > Tom > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot@lists.denx.de > http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot