The latest generation of laptops are shipping with a newer
model of Ricoh chip where the firewire controller is the
primary PCI function but a cardbus controller is also present.
The existing code assumes that if a cardbus controller is,
present, then it must be the one to manipulate - but the real
rule is that you manipulate PCI function 0. This patch adds an
additional constraint that the target must be function 0.
Signed-off-by: Philip Langdale <[email protected]>
---
ricoh_mmc.c | 17 +++++++++++------
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
index a16d760..be9e7b3 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
@@ -11,9 +11,10 @@
/*
* This is a conceptually ridiculous driver, but it is required by the way
- * the Ricoh multi-function R5C832 works. This chip implements firewire
- * and four different memory card controllers. Two of those controllers are
- * an SDHCI controller and a proprietary MMC controller. The linux SDHCI
+ * the Ricoh multi-function chips (R5CXXX) work. These chips implement
+ * the four main memory card controllers (SD, MMC, MS, xD) and one or both
+ * of cardbus or firewire. It happens that they implement SD and MMC
+ * support as separate controllers (and PCI functions). The linux SDHCI
* driver supports MMC cards but the chip detects MMC cards in hardware
* and directs them to the MMC controller - so the SDHCI driver never sees
* them. To get around this, we must disable the useless MMC controller.
@@ -21,8 +22,10 @@
* a detection event occurs immediately, even if the MMC card is already
* in the reader.
*
- * The relevant registers live on the firewire function, so this is unavoidably
- * ugly. Such is life.
+ * It seems to be the case that the relevant PCI registers to deactivate the
+ * MMC controller live on PCI function 0, which might be the cardbus controller
+ * or the firewire controller, depending on the particular chip in question. As
+ * such, it makes what this driver has to do unavoidably ugly. Such is life.
*/
#include <linux/pci.h>
@@ -143,6 +146,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_RICOH,
PCI_DEVICE_ID_RICOH_RL5C476, fw_dev))) {
if (PCI_SLOT(pdev->devfn) == PCI_SLOT(fw_dev->devfn) &&
+ PCI_FUNC(fw_dev->devfn) == 0 &&
pdev->bus == fw_dev->bus) {
if (ricoh_mmc_disable(fw_dev) != 0)
return -ENODEV;
@@ -160,6 +164,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
(fw_dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_RICOH,
PCI_DEVICE_ID_RICOH_R5C832, fw_dev))) {
if (PCI_SLOT(pdev->devfn) == PCI_SLOT(fw_dev->devfn) &&
+ PCI_FUNC(fw_dev->devfn) == 0 &&
pdev->bus == fw_dev->bus) {
if (ricoh_mmc_disable(fw_dev) != 0)
return -ENODEV;
@@ -172,7 +177,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
if (!ctrlfound) {
printk(KERN_WARNING DRIVER_NAME
- ": Main firewire function not found. Cannot disable controller.\n");
+ ": Main Ricoh function not found. Cannot disable controller.\n");
return -ENODEV;
}
On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 20:27:50 -0500 (EST) [email protected] wrote:
> The latest generation of laptops are shipping with a newer
> model of Ricoh chip where the firewire controller is the
> primary PCI function but a cardbus controller is also present.
>
> The existing code assumes that if a cardbus controller is,
> present, then it must be the one to manipulate - but the real
> rule is that you manipulate PCI function 0. This patch adds an
> additional constraint that the target must be function 0.
>
> Signed-off-by: Philip Langdale <[email protected]>
> ---
>
> ricoh_mmc.c | 17 +++++++++++------
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
> index a16d760..be9e7b3 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
> @@ -11,9 +11,10 @@
>
> /*
> * This is a conceptually ridiculous driver, but it is required by the way
> - * the Ricoh multi-function R5C832 works. This chip implements firewire
> - * and four different memory card controllers. Two of those controllers are
> - * an SDHCI controller and a proprietary MMC controller. The linux SDHCI
> + * the Ricoh multi-function chips (R5CXXX) work. These chips implement
> + * the four main memory card controllers (SD, MMC, MS, xD) and one or both
> + * of cardbus or firewire. It happens that they implement SD and MMC
> + * support as separate controllers (and PCI functions). The linux SDHCI
> * driver supports MMC cards but the chip detects MMC cards in hardware
> * and directs them to the MMC controller - so the SDHCI driver never sees
> * them. To get around this, we must disable the useless MMC controller.
> @@ -21,8 +22,10 @@
> * a detection event occurs immediately, even if the MMC card is already
> * in the reader.
> *
> - * The relevant registers live on the firewire function, so this is unavoidably
> - * ugly. Such is life.
> + * It seems to be the case that the relevant PCI registers to deactivate the
> + * MMC controller live on PCI function 0, which might be the cardbus controller
> + * or the firewire controller, depending on the particular chip in question. As
> + * such, it makes what this driver has to do unavoidably ugly. Such is life.
> */
>
> #include <linux/pci.h>
The above two hunks already are in linux-next.
> @@ -143,6 +146,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_RICOH,
> PCI_DEVICE_ID_RICOH_RL5C476, fw_dev))) {
> if (PCI_SLOT(pdev->devfn) == PCI_SLOT(fw_dev->devfn) &&
> + PCI_FUNC(fw_dev->devfn) == 0 &&
> pdev->bus == fw_dev->bus) {
> if (ricoh_mmc_disable(fw_dev) != 0)
> return -ENODEV;
> @@ -160,6 +164,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
> (fw_dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_RICOH,
> PCI_DEVICE_ID_RICOH_R5C832, fw_dev))) {
> if (PCI_SLOT(pdev->devfn) == PCI_SLOT(fw_dev->devfn) &&
> + PCI_FUNC(fw_dev->devfn) == 0 &&
> pdev->bus == fw_dev->bus) {
> if (ricoh_mmc_disable(fw_dev) != 0)
> return -ENODEV;
> @@ -172,7 +177,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
>
> if (!ctrlfound) {
> printk(KERN_WARNING DRIVER_NAME
> - ": Main firewire function not found. Cannot disable controller.\n");
> + ": Main Ricoh function not found. Cannot disable controller.\n");
> return -ENODEV;
> }
Those three are not.
Andrew Morton wrote:
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
>> index a16d760..be9e7b3 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/ricoh_mmc.c
>> @@ -11,9 +11,10 @@
>>
>> /*
>> * This is a conceptually ridiculous driver, but it is required by the way
>> - * the Ricoh multi-function R5C832 works. This chip implements firewire
>> - * and four different memory card controllers. Two of those controllers are
>> - * an SDHCI controller and a proprietary MMC controller. The linux SDHCI
>> + * the Ricoh multi-function chips (R5CXXX) work. These chips implement
>> + * the four main memory card controllers (SD, MMC, MS, xD) and one or both
>> + * of cardbus or firewire. It happens that they implement SD and MMC
>> + * support as separate controllers (and PCI functions). The linux SDHCI
>> * driver supports MMC cards but the chip detects MMC cards in hardware
>> * and directs them to the MMC controller - so the SDHCI driver never sees
>> * them. To get around this, we must disable the useless MMC controller.
>> @@ -21,8 +22,10 @@
>> * a detection event occurs immediately, even if the MMC card is already
>> * in the reader.
>> *
>> - * The relevant registers live on the firewire function, so this is unavoidably
>> - * ugly. Such is life.
>> + * It seems to be the case that the relevant PCI registers to deactivate the
>> + * MMC controller live on PCI function 0, which might be the cardbus controller
>> + * or the firewire controller, depending on the particular chip in question. As
>> + * such, it makes what this driver has to do unavoidably ugly. Such is life.
>> */
>>
>> #include <linux/pci.h>
>
> The above two hunks already are in linux-next.
>
>> @@ -143,6 +146,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
>> pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_RICOH,
>> PCI_DEVICE_ID_RICOH_RL5C476, fw_dev))) {
>> if (PCI_SLOT(pdev->devfn) == PCI_SLOT(fw_dev->devfn) &&
>> + PCI_FUNC(fw_dev->devfn) == 0 &&
>> pdev->bus == fw_dev->bus) {
>> if (ricoh_mmc_disable(fw_dev) != 0)
>> return -ENODEV;
>> @@ -160,6 +164,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
>> (fw_dev = pci_get_device(PCI_VENDOR_ID_RICOH,
>> PCI_DEVICE_ID_RICOH_R5C832, fw_dev))) {
>> if (PCI_SLOT(pdev->devfn) == PCI_SLOT(fw_dev->devfn) &&
>> + PCI_FUNC(fw_dev->devfn) == 0 &&
>> pdev->bus == fw_dev->bus) {
>> if (ricoh_mmc_disable(fw_dev) != 0)
>> return -ENODEV;
>> @@ -172,7 +177,7 @@ static int __devinit ricoh_mmc_probe(struct pci_dev *pdev,
>>
>> if (!ctrlfound) {
>> printk(KERN_WARNING DRIVER_NAME
>> - ": Main firewire function not found. Cannot disable controller.\n");
>> + ": Main Ricoh function not found. Cannot disable controller.\n");
>> return -ENODEV;
>> }
>
> Those three are not.
>
Indeed. Pierre, seems like the patch didn't git-apply properly. It's this way in your
tree too. Did you apply the previous garbled version?
--phil
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:37:01 -0800
Philip Langdale <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Indeed. Pierre, seems like the patch didn't git-apply properly. It's this way in your
> tree too. Did you apply the previous garbled version?
>
Odd.
Anyway, I've queued up the fixed versions instead. Should be hitting
next in a day or two.
--
-- Pierre Ossman
WARNING: This correspondence is being monitored by the
Swedish government. Make sure your server uses encryption
for SMTP traffic and consider using PGP for end-to-end
encryption.