lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH V1 1/3] mmc: sdhci-msm: Define new Register address map
Hi Vijay,
On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 3:30 AM Vijay Viswanath <vviswana@codeaurora.org>
wrote:

> From: Sayali Lokhande <sayalil@codeaurora.org>

> For SDCC version 5.0.0, MCI registers are removed from SDCC
> interface and some registers are moved to HC.
> Define a new data structure where we can statically define
> the address offsets for the registers in different SDCC versions.

> Signed-off-by: Sayali Lokhande <sayalil@codeaurora.org>
> Signed-off-by: Vijay Viswanath <vviswana@codeaurora.org>
> ---
> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c | 89
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 89 insertions(+)

> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
> index bb11916..2524455 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
> @@ -137,6 +137,95 @@
> /* Timeout value to avoid infinite waiting for pwr_irq */
> #define MSM_PWR_IRQ_TIMEOUT_MS 5000

> +struct sdhci_msm_offset {
> + u32 core_hc_mode;
> + u32 core_mci_data_cnt;
> + u32 core_mci_status;
> + u32 core_mci_fifo_cnt;
> + u32 core_mci_version;
> + u32 core_generics;
> + u32 core_testbus_config;
> + u32 core_testbus_sel2_bit;
> + u32 core_testbus_ena;
> + u32 core_testbus_sel2;
> + u32 core_pwrctl_status;
> + u32 core_pwrctl_mask;
> + u32 core_pwrctl_clear;
> + u32 core_pwrctl_ctl;
> + u32 core_sdcc_debug_reg;
> + u32 core_dll_config;
> + u32 core_dll_status;
> + u32 core_vendor_spec;
> + u32 core_vendor_spec_adma_err_addr0;
> + u32 core_vendor_spec_adma_err_addr1;
> + u32 core_vendor_spec_func2;
> + u32 core_vendor_spec_capabilities0;
> + u32 core_ddr_200_cfg;
> + u32 core_vendor_spec3;
> + u32 core_dll_config_2;
> + u32 core_ddr_config;
> + u32 core_ddr_config_2;
> +};
> +
> +static const struct sdhci_msm_offset sdhci_msm_v5_offset = {
> + .core_mci_data_cnt = 0x35c,
> + .core_mci_status = 0x324,
> + .core_mci_fifo_cnt = 0x308,
> + .core_mci_version = 0x318,
> + .core_generics = 0x320,
> + .core_testbus_config = 0x32c,
> + .core_testbus_sel2_bit = 3,
> + .core_testbus_ena = (1 << 31),
> + .core_testbus_sel2 = (1 << 3),
> + .core_pwrctl_status = 0x240,
> + .core_pwrctl_mask = 0x244,
> + .core_pwrctl_clear = 0x248,
> + .core_pwrctl_ctl = 0x24c,
> + .core_sdcc_debug_reg = 0x358,
> + .core_dll_config = 0x200,
> + .core_dll_status = 0x208,
> + .core_vendor_spec = 0x20c,
> + .core_vendor_spec_adma_err_addr0 = 0x214,
> + .core_vendor_spec_adma_err_addr1 = 0x218,
> + .core_vendor_spec_func2 = 0x210,
> + .core_vendor_spec_capabilities0 = 0x21c,
> + .core_ddr_200_cfg = 0x224,
> + .core_vendor_spec3 = 0x250,
> + .core_dll_config_2 = 0x254,
> + .core_ddr_config = 0x258,
> + .core_ddr_config_2 = 0x25c,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct sdhci_msm_offset sdhci_msm_mci_offset = {
> + .core_hc_mode = 0x78,
> + .core_mci_data_cnt = 0x30,
> + .core_mci_status = 0x34,
> + .core_mci_fifo_cnt = 0x44,
> + .core_mci_version = 0x050,
> + .core_generics = 0x70,
> + .core_testbus_config = 0x0CC,
> + .core_testbus_sel2_bit = 4,
> + .core_testbus_ena = (1 << 3),
> + .core_testbus_sel2 = (1 << 4),
> + .core_pwrctl_status = 0xDC,
> + .core_pwrctl_mask = 0xE0,
> + .core_pwrctl_clear = 0xE4,
> + .core_pwrctl_ctl = 0xE8,
> + .core_sdcc_debug_reg = 0x124,
> + .core_dll_config = 0x100,
> + .core_dll_status = 0x108,
> + .core_vendor_spec = 0x10C,
> + .core_vendor_spec_adma_err_addr0 = 0x114,
> + .core_vendor_spec_adma_err_addr1 = 0x118,
> + .core_vendor_spec_func2 = 0x110,
> + .core_vendor_spec_capabilities0 = 0x11C,
> + .core_ddr_200_cfg = 0x184,
> + .core_vendor_spec3 = 0x1B0,
> + .core_dll_config_2 = 0x1B4,
> + .core_ddr_config = 0x1B8,
> + .core_ddr_config_2 = 0x1BC,
> +};
> +

I notice a lot of these are never used in the subsequent patches of this
series. I guess more register definitions are always better than fewer,
it's just a shame that they take up space now. Did you just add everything
that was different between v4 and v5, or how did you come up with this set?

Also, I think lowercase hex letters are preferred.

I verified that the v5 register offsets look good, at least for the
registers I have documentation for.

-Evan

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-05-22 20:11    [W:0.144 / U:0.208 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site