Re: [PATCH V3] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Add nodes for eMMC and SD card
From: sbhanu
Date: Tue Jun 15 2021 - 04:56:18 EST
On 2021-06-14 17:00, sbhanu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 2021-06-11 09:12, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
On Wed 09 Jun 10:20 CDT 2021, Shaik Sajida Bhanu wrote:
Add nodes for eMMC and SD card on sc7280.
Signed-off-by: Shaik Sajida Bhanu <sbhanu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
This change is depends on the below patch series:
https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/cover/1418814/
Change since V2:
- Added leading zero's for register address and "qcom,sc7280-sdhci"
string in compatible as suggested by Stephen Boyd and Doug.
- Removed max-frequency flag, no-mmc and no-sdio flags for Sd
card as suggested by Doug and Stephen Boyd.
- Moved non-removable, no-sd, no-sdio and some pin config changes
from soc to board dts file as suggested by Doug.
- Removed sleep state for CD line and drive-strength for input pins
as suggested by Doug.
- Updated bus vote numbers for eMMC and SD card.
Changes since V1:
- Moved SDHC nodes as suggested by Bjorn Andersson.
- Dropped "pinconf-" prefix as suggested by Bjorn
Andersson.
- Removed extra newlines as suggested by Konrad
Dybcio.
- Changed sd-cd pin to bias-pull-up in sdc2_off
as suggested by Veerabhadrarao Badiganti.
- Added bandwidth votes for eMMC and SD card.
---
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts | 79 +++++++++++++++++
arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi | 146
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 225 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts
b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts
index 3900cfc..8b159d1 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
#include <dt-bindings/iio/qcom,spmi-adc7-pmr735b.h>
#include <dt-bindings/iio/qcom,spmi-adc7-pm8350.h>
#include <dt-bindings/iio/qcom,spmi-adc7-pmk8350.h>
+#include <dt-bindings/gpio/gpio.h>
#include "sc7280.dtsi"
#include "pm7325.dtsi"
#include "pmr735a.dtsi"
@@ -272,6 +273,36 @@
status = "okay";
};
+&sdhc_1 {
+ status = "okay";
+
+ pinctrl-names = "default", "sleep";
+ pinctrl-0 = <&sdc1_clk &sdc1_cmd &sdc1_data &sdc1_rclk>;
+ pinctrl-1 = <&sdc1_clk_sleep &sdc1_cmd_sleep &sdc1_data_sleep
&sdc1_rclk_sleep>;
+
Extra newline.
Sure
+
+ non-removable;
+ no-sd;
+ no-sdio;
+
+ vmmc-supply = <&vreg_l7b_2p9>;
+ vqmmc-supply = <&vreg_l19b_1p8>;
+
Extra newline.
Sure
+};
+
+&sdhc_2 {
+ status = "okay";
+
+ pinctrl-names = "default", "sleep";
+ pinctrl-0 = <&sdc2_clk &sdc2_cmd &sdc2_data &sd_cd>;
+ pinctrl-1 = <&sdc2_clk_sleep &sdc2_cmd_sleep &sdc2_data_sleep>;
+
+ vmmc-supply = <&vreg_l9c_2p9>;
+ vqmmc-supply = <&vreg_l6c_2p9>;
+
+ cd-gpios = <&tlmm 91 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>;
+};
+
&uart5 {
status = "okay";
};
@@ -291,3 +322,51 @@
bias-pull-up;
};
};
+
+&tlmm {
+ sdc1_clk: sdc1-clk {
+ pins = "sdc1_clk";
+ bias-disable;
+ drive-strength = <16>;
+ };
+
+ sdc1_cmd: sdc1-cmd {
+ pins = "sdc1_cmd";
+ bias-pull-up;
+ drive-strength = <10>;
+ };
+
+ sdc1_data: sdc1-data {
+ pins = "sdc1_data";
+ bias-pull-up;
+ drive-strength = <10>;
+ };
+ sdc1_rclk: sdc1-rclk {
+ pins = "sdc1_rclk";
+ bias-pull-down;
+ };
+
+ sdc2_clk: sdc2-clk {
+ pins = "sdc2_clk";
+ bias-disable;
+ drive-strength = <16>;
+ };
+
+ sdc2_cmd: sdc2-cmd {
+ pins = "sdc2_cmd";
+ bias-pull-up;
+ drive-strength = <10>;
+ };
+
+ sdc2_data: sdc2-data {
+ pins = "sdc2_data";
+ bias-pull-up;
+ drive-strength = <10>;
+ };
+
+ sd_cd: sd-cd {
+ pins = "gpio91";
+ bias-pull-up;
+ };
As Konrad pointed out, this is much cleaner described as:
sdc1_default_state: sdc1-default-state {
clk {
};
cmd {
};
data {
};
rclk {
};
};
+
+};
Sure will change this in next version
diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
index 0b6f119..eab6f7b 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
+++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi
@@ -24,6 +24,11 @@
chosen { };
+ aliases {
+ mmc1 = &sdhc_1;
+ mmc2 = &sdhc_2;
+ };
+
clocks {
xo_board: xo-board {
compatible = "fixed-clock";
@@ -430,6 +435,60 @@
#mbox-cells = <2>;
};
+ sdhc_1: sdhci@7c4000 {
+ compatible = "qcom,sc7280-sdhci", "qcom,sdhci-msm-v5";
+ status = "disabled";
+
+ reg = <0 0x007c4000 0 0x1000>,
+ <0 0x007c5000 0 0x1000>;
Whenever you break lines, align your '<' on each line.
ok
+ reg-names = "hc", "cqhci";
+
+ iommus = <&apps_smmu 0xc0 0x0>;
+ interrupts = <GIC_SPI 652 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
+ <GIC_SPI 656 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+ interrupt-names = "hc_irq", "pwr_irq";
+
+ clocks = <&gcc GCC_SDCC1_APPS_CLK>,
+ <&gcc GCC_SDCC1_AHB_CLK>,
+ <&rpmhcc RPMH_CXO_CLK>;
+ clock-names = "core", "iface", "xo";
+ interconnects = <&aggre1_noc MASTER_SDCC_1 0 &mc_virt SLAVE_EBI1
0>,
+ <&gem_noc MASTER_APPSS_PROC 0 &cnoc2 SLAVE_SDCC_1 0>;
+ interconnect-names = "sdhc-ddr","cpu-sdhc";
+ power-domains = <&rpmhpd SC7280_CX>;
+ operating-points-v2 = <&sdhc1_opp_table>;
+
+ bus-width = <8>;
+ supports-cqe;
+
+ qcom,dll-config = <0x0007642c>;
+ qcom,ddr-config = <0x80040868>;
+
+ mmc-ddr-1_8v;
+ mmc-hs200-1_8v;
+ mmc-hs400-1_8v;
+ mmc-hs400-enhanced-strobe;
+
+ sdhc1_opp_table: sdhc1-opp-table {
No need for "sdhc1-" in the node name.
ok
Hi,
For Sd card also we have opp-table info so if we remove "sdhc1-" here
and "sdhc2-" in Sd crad opp table we may have dublicate nodes so,
it is better to keep sdhc1 and sdhc2 in node numbers right.
Thanks,
Sajida
+ compatible = "operating-points-v2";
+
+ opp-100000000 {
+ opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <100000000>;
+ required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_low_svs>;
+ opp-peak-kBps = <1800000 400000>;
+ opp-avg-kBps = <100000 0>;
+ };
+
+ opp-384000000 {
+ opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <384000000>;
+ required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_nom>;
+ opp-peak-kBps = <5400000 1600000>;
+ opp-avg-kBps = <390000 0>;
+ };
+ };
+
+ };
+
qupv3_id_0: geniqup@9c0000 {
compatible = "qcom,geni-se-qup";
reg = <0 0x009c0000 0 0x2000>;
@@ -973,6 +1032,51 @@
};
};
+ sdhc_2: sdhci@8804000 {
+ compatible = "qcom,sc7280-sdhci", "qcom,sdhci-msm-v5";
+ status = "disabled";
+
+ reg = <0 0x08804000 0 0x1000>;
+
+ iommus = <&apps_smmu 0x100 0x0>;
+ interrupts = <GIC_SPI 207 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
+ <GIC_SPI 223 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
+ interrupt-names = "hc_irq", "pwr_irq";
+
+ clocks = <&gcc GCC_SDCC2_APPS_CLK>,
+ <&gcc GCC_SDCC2_AHB_CLK>,
+ <&rpmhcc RPMH_CXO_CLK>;
+ clock-names = "core", "iface", "xo";
+ interconnects = <&aggre1_noc MASTER_SDCC_2 0 &mc_virt SLAVE_EBI1
0>,
+ <&gem_noc MASTER_APPSS_PROC 0 &cnoc2 SLAVE_SDCC_2 0>;
+ interconnect-names = "sdhc-ddr","cpu-sdhc";
+ power-domains = <&rpmhpd SC7280_CX>;
+ operating-points-v2 = <&sdhc2_opp_table>;
+
+ bus-width = <4>;
+
+ qcom,dll-config = <0x0007642c>;
+
+ sdhc2_opp_table: sdhc2-opp-table {
+ compatible = "operating-points-v2";
+
+ opp-100000000 {
+ opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <100000000>;
+ required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_low_svs>;
+ opp-peak-kBps = <1800000 400000>;
+ opp-avg-kBps = <100000 0>;
+ };
+
+ opp-202000000 {
+ opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <202000000>;
+ required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_nom>;
+ opp-peak-kBps = <5400000 1600000>;
+ opp-avg-kBps = <200000 0>;
+ };
+ };
+
+ };
+
system-cache-controller@9200000 {
compatible = "qcom,sc7280-llcc";
reg = <0 0x09200000 0 0xd0000>, <0 0x09600000 0 0x50000>;
@@ -1102,6 +1206,48 @@
pins = "gpio46", "gpio47";
function = "qup13";
};
+
+ sdc1_clk_sleep: sdc1-clk-sleep {
+ pins = "sdc1_clk";
+ drive-strength = <2>;
+ bias-bus-hold;
+ };
+
+ sdc1_cmd_sleep: sdc1-cmd-sleep {
+ pins = "sdc1_cmd";
+ drive-strength = <2>;
+ bias-bus-hold;
+ };
+
+ sdc1_data_sleep: sdc1-data-sleep {
+ pins = "sdc1_data";
+ drive-strength = <2>;
+ bias-bus-hold;
+ };
+
+ sdc1_rclk_sleep: sdc1-rclk-sleep {
+ pins = "sdc1_rclk";
+ bias-bus-hold;
+ };
+
+ sdc2_clk_sleep: sdc2-clk-sleep {
+ pins = "sdc2_clk";
+ drive-strength = <2>;
+ bias-bus-hold;
+ };
+
+ sdc2_cmd_sleep: sdc2-cmd-sleep{
+ pins ="sdc2_cmd";
+ drive-strength = <2>;
+ bias-bus-hold;
+ };
+
+ sdc2_data_sleep: sdc2-data-sleep {
+ pins ="sdc2_data";
+ drive-strength = <2>;
+ bias-bus-hold;
+ };
Please structure these as suggested above.
Sure
+
And please drop this empty line.
Sure
Thanks,
Bjorn
};
apps_smmu: iommu@15000000 {
--
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a
member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation