From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Doug Anderson Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/2] mmc: sdhci-msm: Add support to store supported vdd-io voltages Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 15:52:52 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1522242500-10556-1-git-send-email-vviswana@codeaurora.org> <1522242500-10556-2-git-send-email-vviswana@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1522242500-10556-2-git-send-email-vviswana@codeaurora.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Vijay Viswanath Cc: Adrian Hunter , Ulf Hansson , linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, LKML , Shawn Lin , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, georgi.djakov@linaro.org, asutoshd@codeaurora.org, stummala@codeaurora.org, venkatg@codeaurora.org, pramod.gurav@linaro.org, jeremymc@redhat.com, Bjorn Andersson , riteshh@codeaurora.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org Hi, On Wed, Mar 28, 2018 at 6:08 AM, Vijay Viswanath wrote: > During probe check whether the vdd-io regulator of sdhc platform device > can support 1.8V and 3V and store this information as a capability of > platform device. > > Signed-off-by: Vijay Viswanath > --- > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) Since I commented on v2, please copy me for this series going forward. Thanks. > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c > index c283291..2fcd9010 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c > @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > > #include "sdhci-pltfm.h" > > @@ -81,6 +82,9 @@ > #define CORE_HC_SELECT_IN_HS400 (6 << 19) > #define CORE_HC_SELECT_IN_MASK (7 << 19) > > +#define CORE_3_0V_SUPPORT (1 << 25) > +#define CORE_1_8V_SUPPORT (1 << 26) > + > #define CORE_CSR_CDC_CTLR_CFG0 0x130 > #define CORE_SW_TRIG_FULL_CALIB BIT(16) > #define CORE_HW_AUTOCAL_ENA BIT(17) > @@ -148,6 +152,7 @@ struct sdhci_msm_host { > u32 curr_io_level; > wait_queue_head_t pwr_irq_wait; > bool pwr_irq_flag; > + u32 caps_0; > }; > > static unsigned int msm_get_clock_rate_for_bus_mode(struct sdhci_host *host, > @@ -1103,7 +1108,7 @@ static void sdhci_msm_handle_pwr_irq(struct sdhci_host *host, int irq) > struct sdhci_msm_host *msm_host = sdhci_pltfm_priv(pltfm_host); > u32 irq_status, irq_ack = 0; > int retry = 10; > - int pwr_state = 0, io_level = 0; > + u32 pwr_state = 0, io_level = 0; > > > irq_status = readl_relaxed(msm_host->core_mem + CORE_PWRCTL_STATUS); > @@ -1313,6 +1318,30 @@ static void sdhci_msm_writeb(struct sdhci_host *host, u8 val, int reg) > sdhci_msm_check_power_status(host, req_type); > } > > +static int sdhci_msm_set_regulator_caps(struct sdhci_msm_host *msm_host) This function always returns 0. Make it void. > +{ > + struct mmc_host *mmc = msm_host->mmc; > + struct regulator *supply = mmc->supply.vqmmc; > + u32 caps = 0; > + > + if (!IS_ERR(mmc->supply.vqmmc)) { > + if (regulator_is_supported_voltage(supply, 1700000, 1950000)) > + caps |= CORE_1_8V_SUPPORT; > + if (regulator_is_supported_voltage(supply, 2700000, 3600000)) > + caps |= CORE_3_0V_SUPPORT; > + > + if (!caps) > + pr_warn("%s: %s: 1.8/3V not supported for vqmmc\n", > + mmc_hostname(mmc), __func__); Please remove __func__. You already have the unique thing to find the right driver (AKA mmc_hostname(mmc)) and the string itself should be enough from there. > + } > + > + msm_host->caps_0 |= caps; > + pr_debug("%s: %s: supported caps: 0x%08x\n", mmc_hostname(mmc), > + __func__, caps); Same, no need for __func__. > + > + return 0; > +} > + > static const struct of_device_id sdhci_msm_dt_match[] = { > { .compatible = "qcom,sdhci-msm-v4" }, > {}, > @@ -1530,6 +1559,10 @@ static int sdhci_msm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > ret = sdhci_add_host(host); > if (ret) > goto pm_runtime_disable; > + ret = sdhci_msm_set_regulator_caps(msm_host); > + if (ret) > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to set regulator caps: %d\n", > + ret); If you find some reason _not_ to make sdhci_msm_set_regulator_caps() return "void" as per above, you should actually do something about this error. You've used "dev_err" which makes me feel like you consider this a serious error. Presumably it should cause the probe to fail? -Doug