[PATCH v4 1/3] mmc: dw_mmc: update clock after host reach a stable voltage
alim.akhtar at gmail.com
Tue Feb 24 23:52:36 PST 2015
On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 5:19 AM, Doug Anderson <dianders at chromium.org> wrote:
> Alim and Addy,
> On Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Addy,
>> On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Addy Ke <addy.ke at rock-chips.com> wrote:
>>> As show in mmc_power_up(), in MMC_POWER_UP state, the voltage isn't
>>> stable and we may get 'data busy' which can't be cleaned by resetting
>>> all blocks. So we should not send command to update clock in this state.
>>> Signed-off-by: Addy Ke <addy.ke at rock-chips.com>
>>> drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c | 3 ++-
>>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>>> index 4d2e3c2..3472f9b 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>>> @@ -1102,7 +1102,8 @@ static void dw_mci_set_ios(struct mmc_host *mmc, struct mmc_ios *ios)
>>> drv_data->set_ios(slot->host, ios);
>>> /* Slot specific timing and width adjustment */
>>> - dw_mci_setup_bus(slot, false);
>>> + if (ios->power_mode != MMC_POWER_UP)
>>> + dw_mci_setup_bus(slot, false);
>> This looks a HACK to me.
>> If stabilizing host voltage regulator is the problem, can you try out
>> below patch, and see if this resolve your issue?
> Actually, IMHO Alim's patch is more of a hack than Addy's. There's
> already a 10ms delay between "power up" and "power on" in the MMC core
> in mmc_power_up() state. That delay is commented as:
Well, my suggestion (adding 5ms in switch_volatge) was based on DW_MMC
databook (V2.41a) section "188.8.131.52 Voltage switch Normal Scenario"
step #7 which says:" After the 5ms timer expires, the host voltage
regulator is stable".
PS: I have limited to no access of my mails and workstation until
March 9th, so replies will be slow.
> * This delay should be sufficient to allow the power supply
> * to reach the minimum voltage.
> That means that assuming that the voltage is stable in MMC_POWER_UP is
> not valid anyway.
> Addy's patch certainly needs more comments. In another context Olof suggested:
> * Skip bus setup while voltage is still stabilizing. Instead,
> * bus setup will be done at MMC_POWER_ON.
> ...thinking about this more, though: really the voltage should be
> stabilized when the regulator call returns (see my comments below).
> In actuality the "right" fix might be to just rearrange this function
> a little not to turn the clock on _before_ we even try to turn the
> voltage on.
> I've got that coded up but I'm still testing it... If you want to try
> it too, you can find it at
> Note that without my patch I find that I _really_ need Addy's patch to
> make sure that the card isn't busy in setup_bus. With my patch Addy's
> code catches the card busy less often. I'm still trying to see if
> there's a way to totally remove the need for his setup_bus and still
> trying to grok all the patches flying around...
>> [PATCH] mmc: dw_mmc: Wait for host voltage regulator to be stable
>> Signed-off-by: Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar at samsung.com>
>> drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c | 3 +++
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>> index 4d2e3c2..dc10fbb 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>> @@ -1202,6 +1202,9 @@ static int dw_mci_switch_voltage(struct mmc_host
>> *mmc, struct mmc_ios *ios)
>> mci_writel(host, UHS_REG, uhs);
>> + /* wait for 5ms so that host voltage regulator is stable */
>> + usleep_range(5000, 5500);
> Alim: if you have some other instance where you actually need VQMMC to
> stabilize it should probably be done in a different way. If I
> understand correctly it is the regulator core's job to make sure that
> voltage is stable before returning. If you have a gpio-regulator you
> may be able to use "startup-delay-us" to specify how long the
> regulator takes to come up. You could also look at
More information about the Linux-rockchip