Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S966883Ab3HIAQ6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Aug 2013 20:16:58 -0400 Received: from mail-qc0-f174.google.com ([209.85.216.174]:58174 "EHLO mail-qc0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S966748Ab3HIAQ4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Aug 2013 20:16:56 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 17:16:55 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: dw_mmc: Does anyone use multiple slots? From: Doug Anderson To: James Hogan , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" , Chris Ball , Tomasz Figa Cc: Olof Johansson , Jaehoon Chung , Seungwon Jeon , Grant Grundler , Alim Akhtar , Abhilash Kesavan , Doug Anderson , linux-samsung-soc , Kukjin Kim , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , Sonny Rao Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2289 Lines: 52 Hi, A quick question: does anyone know of any hardware that actually implements multiple slots per host on the dw_mmc controller? When working on the driver I often find myself running into questions about how things should work on the theoretical "multiple slot" dw_mmc implementation. ...and I often find bugs where things couldn't possibly work for a multiple slot implementation. As an example, recently I sent up (870556a mmc: dw_mmc: Handle late vmmc regulators with EPROBE_DEFER). Before that patch the host-global "host->vmmc" was being set once per slot. Said another way, if slot 0 set host->mmc to ABC, then slot 1 would come along and clobber host->mmc to DEF. After my patch the dw_mmc code assumes one vmmc regulator per host. As Tomasz pointed out, that might not be so good (*), but it was better than what was there before. Maybe all multislot implementations don't use vmmc? Another example, though, is dw_mci_init_slot(). It calls this once per slot: mmc_alloc_host(sizeof(struct dw_mci_slot), host->dev); ...where "host->dev" is shared among all the slots. I haven't tested it (since I don't have multislot), but that doesn't seem wise to me. Reading through mmc_alloc_host(), it looks like it assumes that this host owns host->dev and it feels free to clobber variables. Sound familiar? I guess my overall question is: if there are no actual implementations of multislot, shouldn't we kill it and simplify the code a whole lot? If someone out there has a real multislot device they can step back in and do it more correctly? Of course we need to find someone to actually go through and do the killing of multislot, but finding that person might be easier if there was some agreement that it was good to do. Cheers? Flames? -Doug --- (*) On the other hand, maybe my patch is OK. A reasonable way that multi-slot power might work is with a since vmmc and then it is multiplexed through with PWREN? All I know is that exynos says "PWREN" is not implemented and that exynos only has one slot per host. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/