[PATCH v2 0/9] Init runtime PM support for dw_mmc

Jaehoon Chung jh80.chung at samsung.com
Thu Oct 20 18:56:55 PDT 2016

Hi Shawn,

On 10/18/2016 08:35 PM, Shawn Lin wrote:
> 在 2016/10/18 16:46, Ulf Hansson 写道:
>> + Heiko
>> On 12 October 2016 at 04:50, Shawn Lin <shawn.lin at rock-chips.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Jaehoon and Ulf,

I applied this on my repository. If there are any issue, let me know.
And minor issue can be fixed..step by step.

Best Regards,
Jaehoon Chung

>>>    This patch is gonna support runtime PM for dw_mmc.
>>> It could support to disable ciu_clk by default and disable
>>> biu_clk if the devices are non-removeable, or removeable
>>> with gpio-base card detect.
>>>    Then I remove the system PM since the runtime PM actually
>>> does the same thing as it. So I help migrate the dw_mmc variant
>>> drivers to use runtime PM pairs and pm_runtime_force_*. Note
>>> that I only enable runtime PM for dw_mmc-rockchip as I will
>>> leave the decision to the owners of the corresponding drivers.
>>> I just tested it on my RK3288 platform with linux-next to make
>>> the runtime PM and system PM work fine for my emmc, sd card and
>>> sdio. But I don't have hardware to help test other variant drivers.
>>> But in theory it should work fine as I mentioned that the runtime
>>> PM does the same thing as system PM except for disabling ciu_clk
>>> aggressively which should not be related to the variant hosts.
>>>    As you could see that I just extend the slot-gpio a bit, so the
>>> ideal way is Ulf could pick them up with Jaehoon's ack. :)
>> The mmc core change looks fine to me, so I will wait for a pull
>> request from Jaehoon.
>>> Changes in v2:
>>> - use struct device as argument for runtime callback
>>> - use dw_mci_runtime_* directly
>>> - use dw_mci_runtime_* directly
>>> - minor fix since I change the argument for dw_mci_runtime_*
>>> - use dw_mci_runtime_* directly
>>> - use dw_mci_runtime_* directly
>>> Shawn Lin (9):
>>>   mmc: dw_mmc: add runtime PM callback
>>>   mmc: dw_mmc-rockchip: add runtime PM support
>>>   mmc: core: expose the capability of gpio card detect
>>>   mmc: dw_mmc: disable biu clk if possible
>>>   mmc: dw_mmc-k3: deploy runtime PM facilities
>>>   mmc: dw_mmc-exynos: deploy runtime PM facilities
>>>   mmc: dw_mmc-pci: deploy runtime PM facilities
>>>   mmc: dw_mmc-pltfm: deploy runtime PM facilities
>>>   mmc: dw_mmc: remove system PM callback
>>>  drivers/mmc/core/slot-gpio.c       |  8 +++++++
>>>  drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc-exynos.c   | 24 +++++++++-----------
>>>  drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc-k3.c       | 39 ++++++++------------------------
>>>  drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc-pci.c      | 29 ++++++++----------------
>>>  drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc-pltfm.c    | 28 +++++++----------------
>>>  drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc-rockchip.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>>>  drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c          | 46 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>>>  drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.h          |  6 ++---
>>>  include/linux/mmc/slot-gpio.h      |  1 +
>>>  9 files changed, 117 insertions(+), 106 deletions(-)
>> Overall these changes looks good to me, so I am ready to accept the PR
>> from Jaehoon!!
>> Although, highly related to this patchset, I am worried that there is
>> a misunderstanding on how MMC_PM_KEEP_POWER (DT binding
>> "keep-power-in-suspend") is being used for dw_mmc. Perhaps I am wrong,
>> but I would appreciate if you could elaborate a bit for my
>> understanding.
>> First, this cap is solely intended to be used for controllers which
>> may have SDIO cards attached, as it indicates those cards may be
>> configured to be powered on while the system enters suspend state. By
>> looking at some DTS files, for example
>> arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3368-orion-r68-meta.dts which uses it
>> for an eMMC slot, this is clearly being abused.
> Indeed. In general, it should be copy-paste issues as folks maybe write
> their dts referring to the exist dts there. So yes, I will do some cleanup work for them in prevent of further spread of abused code.
>> Anyway, the wrong DT configurations might not be a big deal, as in
>> dw_mci_resume(), it's not the capabilities bit that is checked but the
>> corresponding "pm_flag". This flag is set via calling
>> sdio_set_host_pm_flags(), but as that doesn't happen for an eMMC card
>> we should be fine, right!?
>> Now, what also do puzzles me, is exactly that piece of code in
>> dw_mci_resume() that is being executed *when* the pm_flag contains
>> if (slot->mmc->pm_flags & MMC_PM_KEEP_POWER) {
>>      dw_mci_set_ios(slot->mmc, &slot->mmc->ios);
>>      dw_mci_setup_bus(slot, true);
>> }
>> So, in the system resume path, the above do makes sense as you need to
>> restore the registers etc for the dw_mmc controller to enable it to
>> operate the SDIO card. Such as bus width, clocks, etc.
>> Although, I would expect something similar would be needed in the new
>> runtime resume path as well. And in particular also for eMMC/SD cards,
>> as you need to restore the dw_mmc registers to be able to operate the
>> card again. Don't you?
> yes, we do.
>> So in the end, perhaps you should *always* call dw_mci_set_ios() and
>> dw_mci_setup_bus() in dw_mci_resume() instead of conditionally check
>> for MMC_PM_KEEP_POWER? Or maybe only a subset of those functions?
> Thanks for noticing this.
> Personally, I realize there is no need to check MMC_PM_KEEP_POWER but
> it could be highly related to the cost of S-2-R, I guess. I just checked
> sdhci and saw the similar cases you mentioned at the first glance.
> Maybe I'm wrong but I need more time to investigate this issue later.
> There are still some on-going cleanup work for dw_mmc listed on my TODO
> list, including bugfix, legacy/redundant code etc.. So I will check this one either. Maybe Jaehoon could also do some stree test on enxyos
> platforms. :)
>> Kind regards
>> Uffe

More information about the Linux-rockchip mailing list