[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4] mmc: mxs-mmc: Introduce regulator support
On 31.01.19 14:09, Robin van der Gracht wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 13:17:23 +0100
> Ulf Hansson <> wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 at 09:20, Robin van der Gracht <> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 22:15:23 +0100
>>> Ulf Hansson <> wrote:


>>>> BTW, you didn't really answer my earlier question about the TI WiFi
>>>> chip. Doesn't you need a special clock for WiFi chip as well? How do
>>>> you intend to manage that?
>>> I used an external 32K oscillator (SLOW_CLK) for my wl1271. Other
>>> clocks ware generated on the module.
>> Right. How do you control that clock? Did you model it as clock via
>> the common clock framework?
> No I didn't. The slow clock (sleep clock) was always 'on'.
>>> I had to supply a 'vmmc-supply' in your wl1271 devicetree node,
>>> which will be used to power on/off the wlan module. The supply should
>>> be a (delayed) GPIO controlled 'fixed-regulator' attached to the
>>> wlan_en pin on the module.
>> Right, thanks for explaining.
>>> 1: Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/ti,wlcore.txt
>> This sounds like a good fit for mmc pwrseq simple. There are already
>> similar users for it.
>> Have a look at: /drivers/mmc/core/pwrseq*
>> If the mmc host driver calls mmc_of_parse() during ->probe(), a pwrseq
>> instance will be hooked up to it. Once the mmc core tries to power up
>> the card it will make use of the attached pwrseq for the mmc host in
>> question.
>> In this way, you can control the clock and GPIO line, in more exact
>> ways that is needed by the WiFi chip.
> Ack. Makes more sense than using a regulator (even without specifying
> 'clocks').

Thanks Ulf! Sounds promising.

>> Here is a DT example (look for "mmc-pwrseq-simple"):
>> arch/arm/boot/dts/imx6qdl-sr-som-ti.dtsi
>> This should do the trick for you. On the other hand, I don't mind that
>> you still add regulator support to the driver, along the lines of what
>> $subject patch does, however it may not be exactly what you need for
>> the WiFi case.
> @Martin; What do you think? Will you work this out with Ulf?
> Since I can't test this.

I'll test Ulf's suggestion and go that way if I get it to work. Give me
a few days though.

Thanks a lot for your help so far Robin,

[unhandled content-type:application/x-pkcs7-signature]
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-01-31 14:16    [W:0.059 / U:0.328 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site