Re: FW: [PATCH v2] mmc: sdhci: apply voltage range check only fornon-fixed regulators
From: Marek Szyprowski
Date: Tue Nov 20 2012 - 05:16:55 EST
Hello,
On 11/20/2012 9:59 AM, Kevin Liu wrote:
2012/11/20 Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Hello,
>
>
> On 11/14/2012 8:11 AM, Kevin Liu wrote:
>>
>> > From: linux-mmc-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > [mailto:linux-mmc-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Chris Ball
>> > Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 10:14 PM
>> > To: Marek Szyprowski
>> > Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Kyungmin
>> > Park; Mark Brown; Liam Girdwood; Philip Rakity
>> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mmc: sdhci: apply voltage range check only for
>> > non-fixed regulators
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Tue, Nov 13 2012, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
>> >>> On Tue, Nov 13 2012, Marek Szyprowski wrote:
>> >>> > Fixed regulators cannot change their voltage, so disable all voltage
>> >>> > range checking for them, otherwise the driver fails to operate with
>> >>> > fixed regulators. Up to now it worked only by luck, because
>> >>> > regulator_is_supported_voltage() function returned incorrect values.
>> >>> > Commit "regulator: fix voltage check in
>> >>> > regulator_is_supported_voltage()"
>> >>> > fixed that function and now additional check is needed for fixed
>> >>> > regulators.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Signed-off-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >>> > ---
>> >>> > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c | 2 +-
>> >>> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> >>> >
>> >>> > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c
>> >>> > index c7851c0..6f6534e 100644
>> >>> > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c
>> >>> > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c
>> >>> > @@ -2923,7 +2923,7 @@ int sdhci_add_host(struct sdhci_host *host)
>> >>> > regulator_enable(host->vmmc);
>> >>> >
>> >>> > #ifdef CONFIG_REGULATOR
>> >>> > - if (host->vmmc) {
>> >>> > + if (host->vmmc && regulator_count_voltages(host->vmmc) > 1) {
>> >>> > ret = regulator_is_supported_voltage(host->vmmc, 3300000,
>> >>> > 3300000);
>> >>> > if ((ret <= 0) || (!(caps[0] & SDHCI_CAN_VDD_330)))
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks for the longer explanation. I'm still missing something,
>> >>> though;
>> >>> what's wrong with running the check as it was with the new regulator
>> >>> code?
>> >>> (I haven't tried it yet.)
>> >>>
>> >>> #ifdef CONFIG_REGULATOR
>> >>> if (host->vmmc) {
>> >>> ret = regulator_is_supported_voltage(host->vmmc,
>> >>> 3300000,
>> >>> 3300000);
>> >>> if ((ret <= 0) || (!(caps[0] & SDHCI_CAN_VDD_330)))
>> >>> caps[0] &= ~SDHCI_CAN_VDD_330;
>> >>> ret = regulator_is_supported_voltage(host->vmmc,
>> >>> 3000000,
>> >>> 3000000);
>> >>> if ((ret <= 0) || (!(caps[0] & SDHCI_CAN_VDD_300)))
>> >>> caps[0] &= ~SDHCI_CAN_VDD_300;
>> >>> ret = regulator_is_supported_voltage(host->vmmc,
>> >>> 1800000,
>> >>> 1800000);
>> >>> if ((ret <= 0) || (!(caps[0] & SDHCI_CAN_VDD_180)))
>> >>> caps[0] &= ~SDHCI_CAN_VDD_180;
>> >>> }
>> >>> #endif /* CONFIG_REGULATOR */
>> >>>
>> >>> The point is to remove unsupported voltages, so if someone sets up a
>> >>> fixed regulator at 3300000, all of the other caps are disabled. Why
>> >>> wouldn't that work without this change, and how are we supposed to
>> >>> remove those caps on a fixed regulator after your patchset?
>> >>>
>> >>> Thanks, sorry if I'm missing something obvious,
>> >>
>> >> On our boards eMMC is connected to fixed 2.8V regulator, what results
>> >> in
>> >> clearing all available voltages and fail. The same situation is when
>> >> one
>> >> enable dummy regulator and try to use sdhci with it. My patch fixes
>> >> this
>> >> and restores sdhci to working state as it was before (before fixing
>> >> regulator regulator_is_supported_voltage() function and earlier when
>> >> MMC_BROKEN_VOLATGE capability was used).
>> >
>> > I see. Sounds like a separate bug -- Philip (or anyone else), any
>> > idea how we should be treating eMMCs with a fixed voltage here?
>> >
>>
>> I think we should check the voltage range rather than the voltage
>> point accoring to the spec.
>> Otherwise some valid voltage like 2.8v will be discarded by mistake.
>> My below old patch aim to fix this issue.
>> How do you think?
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Kevin Liu [mailto:keyuan.liu@xxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2012 3:56 PM
>> To: linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; cjb@xxxxxxxxxx; pierre@xxxxxxxxx;
>> ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx; Zhangfei Gao
>> Cc: Haojian Zhuang; Chao Xie; Philip Rakity; Kevin Liu; Jialing Fu
>> Subject: [PATCH v5 03/13] mmc: sdhci: use regulator min/max voltage
>> range according to spec
>>
>> From: Kevin Liu <kliu5@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> For regulator vmmc/vmmcq, use voltage range as below
>> 3.3v/3.0v: (2.7v, 3.6v)
>> 1.8v: (1.7v, 1.95v)
>> Original code use the specific value which may fail in regulator
>> driver if it does NOT support the specific voltage.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jialing Fu <jlfu@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Kevin Liu <kliu5@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> This patch restores sdhci devices to working state on Samsung boards
> (tested on GONI and UniversalC210) after merging "regulator: fix voltage
> check in regulator_is_supported_voltage()" patch to v3.7-rc6 (commit
> f0f98b19e23d4426ca185e3d4ca80e6aff5ef51b). Would be great to have it
> merged before the final v3.7 is out.
>
Marek,
thanks a lot for the verification!
And your patch "mmc: sdhci: apply voltage range check only for
non-fixed regulators" (commit
d5b5205f2d480a47863dda0772d2d9dc47c2b51b, which has been merged in
mmc-next) can be reverted if this patch merged?
Yes, it can be replaced with it, although there is still an issue that need
to be resolved somehow. Right now SDHCI driver fails to initialize if
support
for dummy regulator is enabled.
Best regards
--
Marek Szyprowski
Samsung Poland R&D Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/