From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Evan Green Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 1/3] mmc: sdhci: Allow platform controlled voltage switching Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 15:17:00 -0800 Message-ID: References: <1539004739-32060-1-git-send-email-vbadigan@codeaurora.org> <1539004739-32060-2-git-send-email-vbadigan@codeaurora.org> <9a4708c8-cc43-a690-7ef7-da351eb1f967@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <9a4708c8-cc43-a690-7ef7-da351eb1f967@codeaurora.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: vbadigan@codeaurora.org Cc: adrian.hunter@intel.com, Ulf Hansson , robh+dt@kernel.org, Doug Anderson , asutoshd@codeaurora.org, riteshh@codeaurora.org, stummala@codeaurora.org, sayali , linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, vviswana@codeaurora.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 14, 2018 at 6:36 AM Veerabhadrarao Badiganti wrote: > > >>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.h b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.h > >>> index b001cf4..3c28152 100644 > >>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.h > >>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.h > >>> @@ -524,6 +524,7 @@ struct sdhci_host { > >>> bool pending_reset; /* Cmd/data reset is pending */ > >>> bool irq_wake_enabled; /* IRQ wakeup is enabled */ > >>> bool v4_mode; /* Host Version 4 Enable */ > >>> + bool vqmmc_enabled; /* Vqmmc is enabled */ > >> I still don't love this, since it doesn't mean what it says. Everyone > >> else that has a vqmmc_enabled member uses it to actually mean "vqmmc > >> is enabled", but this doesn't mean that. For example, you don't clear > >> this when you disable the regulator in patch 3, so this would be set > >> even if the regulator is disabled, and you don't set it when sdhci > >> enables the regulator, so the regulator is on when this flag is not > >> set. > >> > Hi Evan > > This flag is meant to say "disable vqmmc *only* if it is enabled by host > driver (sdhci_host)". > If host driver doesn't enable vqmmc (enabled by platfrm driver) or if it > fails to enable it, then don't call disable vqmmc. > > Agree with you, the present name is not conveying its purpose. > It must be something like "vqmmc_enabled_by_host". > > Please let me know if you have any suggestions on this name. Yeah. Maybe vqmmc_pltfrm_controlled? Or vqmmc_enabled_by_platfrm as you suggested? -Evan