Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH V2] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Add nodes for eMMC and SD card | From | Veerabhadrarao Badiganti <> | Date | Thu, 25 Mar 2021 09:28:44 +0530 |
| |
On 3/23/2021 9:41 PM, Doug Anderson wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, Mar 20, 2021 at 11:18 AM Shaik Sajida Bhanu > <sbhanu@codeaurora.org> wrote: >> Add nodes for eMMC and SD card on sc7280. >> >> Signed-off-by: Shaik Sajida Bhanu <sbhanu@codeaurora.org> >> >> --- >> This change is depends on the below patch series: >> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/project/lkml/list/?series=488871 >> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/project/lkml/list/?series=489530 >> https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/project/lkml/list/?series=488429 >> >> Changes since V1: >> - Moved SDHC nodes as suggested by Bjorn Andersson. >> - Dropped "pinconf-" prefix as suggested by Bjorn Andersson. >> - Removed extra newlines as suggested by Konrad Dybcio. >> - Changed sd-cd pin to bias-pull-up in sdc2_off as suggested by >> Veerabhadrarao Badiganti. >> - Added bandwidth votes for eMMC and SD card. >> --- >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts | 25 ++++ >> arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi | 213 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 2 files changed, 238 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts >> index 54d2cb3..4105263 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280-idp.dts >> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ >> /dts-v1/; >> >> #include "sc7280.dtsi" >> +#include <dt-bindings/gpio/gpio.h> >> >> / { >> model = "Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. sc7280 IDP platform"; >> @@ -242,6 +243,30 @@ >> status = "okay"; >> }; >> >> +&sdhc_1 { >> + status = "okay"; > When I apply your patch I find that your sort order is wrong. "s" > comes before "u" and after "q" in the alphabet so "sdhc_1" and > "sdhc_2" should sort _after "qupv3_id_0" and before "uart5" > > >> + pinctrl-names = "default", "sleep"; >> + pinctrl-0 = <&sdc1_on>; >> + pinctrl-1 = <&sdc1_off>; >> + >> + vmmc-supply = <&vreg_l7b_2p9>; >> + vqmmc-supply = <&vreg_l19b_1p8>; >> +}; >> + >> +&sdhc_2 { >> + status = "okay"; >> + >> + pinctrl-names = "default","sleep"; >> + pinctrl-0 = <&sdc2_on>; >> + pinctrl-1 = <&sdc2_off>; >> + >> + vmmc-supply = <&vreg_l9c_2p9>; >> + vqmmc-supply = <&vreg_l6c_2p9>; >> + >> + cd-gpios = <&tlmm 91 GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW>; > Where is the pinctrl for the card detect? Oh, I see it's in > "sdc2_on". Probably would be good to break it out since this is > board-specific. See below. > > >> +}; >> + >> /* PINCTRL - additions to nodes defined in sc7280.dtsi */ >> >> &qup_uart5_default { >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi >> index 8f6b569..69eb064 100644 >> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi >> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7280.dtsi >> @@ -20,6 +20,11 @@ >> >> chosen { }; >> >> + aliases { >> + mmc1 = &sdhc_1; >> + mmc2 = &sdhc_2; >> + }; >> + >> clocks { >> xo_board: xo-board { >> compatible = "fixed-clock"; >> @@ -305,6 +310,64 @@ >> #power-domain-cells = <1>; >> }; >> >> + sdhc_1: sdhci@7c4000 { >> + compatible = "qcom,sdhci-msm-v5"; > Please make the compatible: > compatible = "qcom,sc7280-sdhci", "qcom,sdhci-msm-v5"; > > ...and add to the bindings. It should be a trivial bindings patch so > not too much trouble. > > NOTE: even though the "qcom,sc7280-sdhci" should be in the bindings > and here you _shouldn't_ be adding any code for it. Just let the > fallback compatible string ("qcom,sdhci-msm-v5") do its magic. Adding > the sc7280 specific version is more of a "just in case we need it > later" type thing. > > >> + reg = <0 0x7c4000 0 0x1000>, >> + <0 0x7c5000 0 0x1000>; >> + reg-names = "hc", "cqhci"; >> + >> + iommus = <&apps_smmu 0xC0 0x0>; >> + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 652 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, >> + <GIC_SPI 656 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; >> + interrupt-names = "hc_irq", "pwr_irq"; >> + >> + clocks = <&gcc GCC_SDCC1_APPS_CLK>, >> + <&gcc GCC_SDCC1_AHB_CLK>, >> + <&rpmhcc RPMH_CXO_CLK>; >> + clock-names = "core", "iface", "xo"; > I'm curious: why is the "xo" clock needed here but not for sc7180? Actually its needed even for sc7180. We are making use of this clock in msm_init_cm_dll() The default PoR value is also same as calculated value for HS200/HS400/SDR104 modes. But just not to rely on default register values we need this entry.
> >> + interconnects = <&aggre1_noc MASTER_SDCC_1 0 &mc_virt SLAVE_EBI1 0>, >> + <&gem_noc MASTER_APPSS_PROC 0 &cnoc2 SLAVE_SDCC_1 0>; >> + interconnect-names = "sdhc-ddr","cpu-sdhc"; >> + power-domains = <&rpmhpd SC7280_CX>; >> + operating-points-v2 = <&sdhc1_opp_table>; >> + >> + bus-width = <8>; >> + non-removable; > This was actually a problem on sc7180 too, but you probably don't want > "non-removable" in the SoC file. Board files really should be adding > this. Though the SoC might be designed with the idea that this would > be used for a non-removable eMMC card I don't know why it wouldn't be > possible for someone to hook this up to an external slot and use a > GPIO somewhere as a card detect. > > >> + supports-cqe; >> + no-sd; >> + no-sdio; > Does the port really not support SD / SDIO, or are you adding these > two properties just because on your reference board it's not hooked up > to SD/SDIO? What exactly makes it impossible to use SD/SDIO on this > port? > By having this, we can optimize emmc device scan time. Driver wont issue SDIO & SDcards specific commands while scanning the device.Its little optimization. I think board specific dt is right place.
>> + max-frequency = <192000000>; > Why do you need to specify this? > > >> + qcom,dll-config = <0x0007642c>; >> + qcom,ddr-config = <0x80040868>; > These magic hex values really have no place being in dts which should > have things expressed at a higher level. ...but I guess that ship has > sailed and this is in the bindings so I guess we're stuck with them, > so I guess they're fine. > > >> + mmc-ddr-1_8v; >> + mmc-hs200-1_8v; >> + mmc-hs400-1_8v; >> + mmc-hs400-enhanced-strobe; >> + >> + status = "disabled"; >> + >> + sdhc1_opp_table: sdhc1-opp-table { >> + compatible = "operating-points-v2"; >> + >> + opp-100000000 { >> + opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <100000000>; >> + required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_low_svs>; >> + opp-peak-kBps = <1200000 76000>; >> + opp-avg-kBps = <1200000 50000>; > Why are the kBps numbers so vastly different than the ones on sc7180 > for the same OPP point. That implies: > > a) sc7180 is wrong. > > b) This patch is wrong. > > c) The numbers are essentially random and don't really matter. > > Can you identify which of a), b), or c) is correct, or propose an > alternate explanation of the difference? > > >> + }; >> + >> + opp-384000000 { >> + opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <384000000>; >> + required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_nom>; >> + opp-peak-kBps = <5400000 1600000>; >> + opp-avg-kBps = <6000000 300000>; > These opp numbers are also quite different than sc7180 > > >> + }; >> + }; >> + }; >> + >> qupv3_id_0: geniqup@9c0000 { >> compatible = "qcom,geni-se-qup"; >> reg = <0 0x009c0000 0 0x2000>; >> @@ -328,6 +391,54 @@ >> }; >> }; >> >> + sdhc_2: sdhci@8804000 { >> + compatible = "qcom,sdhci-msm-v5"; >> + reg = <0 0x08804000 0 0x1000>; >> + >> + iommus = <&apps_smmu 0x100 0x0>; >> + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 207 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>, >> + <GIC_SPI 223 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>; >> + interrupt-names = "hc_irq", "pwr_irq"; >> + >> + clocks = <&gcc GCC_SDCC2_APPS_CLK>, >> + <&gcc GCC_SDCC2_AHB_CLK>, >> + <&rpmhcc RPMH_CXO_CLK>; >> + clock-names = "core", "iface", "xo"; >> + interconnects = <&aggre1_noc MASTER_SDCC_2 0 &mc_virt SLAVE_EBI1 0>, >> + <&gem_noc MASTER_APPSS_PROC 0 &cnoc2 SLAVE_SDCC_2 0>; >> + interconnect-names = "sdhc-ddr","cpu-sdhc"; >> + power-domains = <&rpmhpd SC7280_CX>; >> + operating-points-v2 = <&sdhc2_opp_table>; >> + >> + bus-width = <4>; >> + >> + no-mmc; >> + no-sdio; > Similar question to above: why exactly would mmc not work? Are you > saying that if someone hooked this up to a full sized SD card slot and > placed an MMC card into the slot that it wouldn't work? Similar > question about SDIO. If someone placed an external SDIO card into your > slot, would it not work? > As mentioned above, its just to optimize SDcard scan time a little. >> + max-frequency = <202000000>; > Not needed? > >> + >> + qcom,dll-config = <0x0007642c>; >> + >> + status = "disabled"; >> + >> + sdhc2_opp_table: sdhc2-opp-table { >> + compatible = "operating-points-v2"; >> + >> + opp-100000000 { >> + opp-hz =/bits/ 64 <100000000>; >> + required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_low_svs>; >> + opp-peak-kBps = <1200000 76000>; >> + opp-avg-kBps = <1200000 50000>; >> + }; >> + opp-202000000 { > Blank line between the OPPs? > >> + opp-hz = /bits/ 64 <202000000>; >> + required-opps = <&rpmhpd_opp_nom>; >> + opp-peak-kBps = <3500000 1200000>; >> + opp-avg-kBps = <5000000 100000>; >> + }; > Similar questions about why the OPPs are so vastly different from sc7180. > >> + }; >> + }; >> + >> pdc: interrupt-controller@b220000 { >> compatible = "qcom,sc7280-pdc", "qcom,pdc"; >> reg = <0 0x0b220000 0 0x30000>; >> @@ -374,6 +485,108 @@ >> pins = "gpio46", "gpio47"; >> function = "qup13"; >> }; >> + >> + sdc1_on: sdc1-on { >> + clk { >> + pins = "sdc1_clk"; >> + bias-disable; >> + drive-strength = <16>; >> + }; >> + >> + cmd { >> + pins = "sdc1_cmd"; >> + bias-pull-up; >> + drive-strength = <10>; >> + }; >> + >> + data { >> + pins = "sdc1_data"; >> + bias-pull-up; >> + drive-strength = <10>; >> + }; >> + >> + rclk { >> + pins = "sdc1_rclk"; >> + bias-pull-down; >> + }; > * generally "bias" doesn't belong in the SoC file but instead should > be in the board file. Some boards might have external pulls (even if > the internal ones would work fine, hardware designers do weird things) > and thus might need to disable the internal ones (double pulls are not > great). > > * generally drive-strength doesn't belong in the SoC file but should > be in the board file. Different boards with different layouts might > need different drive strengths, right? > > If you remove those two things, I guess there's not actually much left > in the SoC dtsi file so I guess move these all to the board file? That > seems to be what we ended up with in "qrb5165-rb5.dts" / "sm8250.dtsi" > which is an example of a board using the new style of pinctrl for > devicetree. > > >> + }; >> + >> + sdc1_off: sdc1-off { >> + clk { >> + pins = "sdc1_clk"; >> + bias-disable; >> + drive-strength = <2>; >> + }; >> + >> + cmd { >> + pins = "sdc1_cmd"; >> + bias-pull-up; >> + drive-strength = <2>; >> + }; >> + >> + data { >> + pins = "sdc1_data"; >> + bias-pull-up; >> + drive-strength = <2>; >> + }; >> + >> + rclk { >> + pins = "sdc1_rclk"; >> + bias-pull-down; >> + }; >> + }; > No need for a sleep state for the rclk since it's the same as the > active state, right? NOTE: one way to handle this would be to define > one node per pingroup and thus do something like: > > pinctrl-names = "default", "sleep"; > pinctrl-0 = <&sdc1_clk>, <&sdc1_cmd>, <&sdc1_data>, <&sdc1_rclk>; > pinctrl-1 = <&sdc1_clk_sleep>, <&sdc1_cmd_sleep>, <&sdc1_data_sleep>, > <&sdc1_rclk>; > > I do wish we could avoid having to duplicate the "bias" in every board > file. Hrm, I wonder if this could be made simpler by actually putting > the "sleep" states in the sc7180.dtsi file (not the board file) and > using "bias-bus-hold" to avoid it being board specific? > > Thus (assuming it works), the total summary would be: > > 1. Board dts file fully defines "sdc1_clk", "sdc1_cmd", "sdc1_data", > "sdc1_rclk", specifying whatever bias and drive strength needed for > the board. > > 2. SoC dtsi fully defines "sdc1_clk_sleep", "sdc1_cmd_sleep", > "sdc1_data_sleep", "sdc1_rclk_sleep", specifying drive-strength of 2 > (for outputs) and "bias-bus-hold" which is OK for all board. > > >> + >> + sdc2_on: sdc2-on { >> + clk { >> + pins = "sdc2_clk"; >> + bias-disable; >> + drive-strength = <16>; >> + }; >> + >> + cmd { >> + pins = "sdc2_cmd"; >> + bias-pull-up; >> + drive-strength = <10>; >> + }; >> + >> + data { >> + pins = "sdc2_data"; >> + bias-pull-up; >> + drive-strength = <10>; >> + }; >> + >> + sd-cd { >> + pins = "gpio91"; > NOTE: even if we find some reason to keep some of the pinctrl in the > SoC dtsi file, the card detect almost certainly needs to move _fully_ > to the board dts file. Different boards could use a different card > detect pin. > >> + bias-pull-up; >> + drive-strength = <2>; > Drive strength isn't needed for input pins. Please remove. > >> + }; >> + }; >> + >> + sdc2_off: sdc2-off { >> + clk { >> + pins = "sdc2_clk"; >> + bias-disable; >> + drive-strength = <2>; >> + }; >> + >> + cmd { >> + pins = "sdc2_cmd"; >> + bias-pull-up; >> + drive-strength = <2>; >> + }; >> + >> + data { >> + pins = "sdc2_data"; >> + bias-pull-up; >> + drive-strength = <2>; >> + }; >> + >> + sd-cd { >> + pins = "gpio91"; >> + bias-pull-up; >> + drive-strength = <2>; >> + }; > There's definitely no need for a separate sleep state for the CD line. > > > -Doug
| |