[PATCH] mmc: mmci: stm32: add SDIO in-band interrupt mode
Yann Gautier
yann.gautier at foss.st.com
Mon Sep 4 00:30:37 PDT 2023
On 9/2/23 18:43, Linus Walleij wrote:
> Hi Yann/Christophe,
>
> just a quick note:
>
> On Fri, Sep 1, 2023 at 2:08 PM Yann Gautier <yann.gautier at foss.st.com> wrote:
>
>> +static void sdmmc_enable_sdio_irq(struct mmci_host *host, int enable)
>> +{
>> + void __iomem *base = host->base;
>> + u32 mask = readl_relaxed(base + MMCIMASK0);
>> +
>> + if (enable)
>> + writel_relaxed(mask | MCI_ST_SDIOITMASK, base + MMCIMASK0);
>> + else
>> + writel_relaxed(mask & ~MCI_ST_SDIOITMASK, base + MMCIMASK0);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void sdmmc_sdio_irq(struct mmci_host *host, u32 status)
>> +{
>> + if (status & MCI_ST_SDIOIT) {
>> + sdmmc_enable_sdio_irq(host, 0);
>> + sdio_signal_irq(host->mmc);
>> + }
>> +}
>
> You need to move these to mmci and rename them since Ux500 will use
> the same callbacks.
Hi Linus,
Yes, that's what I was planning to do.
>
>> static struct mmci_host_ops sdmmc_variant_ops = {
>> .validate_data = sdmmc_idma_validate_data,
> (...)
>> + .enable_sdio_irq = sdmmc_enable_sdio_irq,
>> + .sdio_irq = sdmmc_sdio_irq,
>> };
>
> What about dropping the per-variant callbacks and just inline
> this into mmci_enable_sdio_irq()/mmci_ack_sdio_irq() since
> so many variants have the same scheme? I haven't looked
> at the Qualcomm variant though, maybe it is completely
> different...
I'm not sure about this. Keeping the ops will make it easier for other
variants to bring their own code if their scheme is different.
Best regards,
Yann
>
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list