[U-Boot] [PATCH V2 09/12] mmc: omap_hsmmc: add mmc1 pbias, ldo1

[Lokesh Vutla]

On Wednesday 05 June 2013 02:36 AM, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 10:58:27PM +0300, Lubomir Popov wrote:
>> Hi Lokesh,
>>
>>> Hi Lubomir,
>>> On Thursday 30 May 2013 07:56 PM, Lubomir Popov wrote:
>>>> Hi Lokesh,
>>>>
>>>> On 30/05/13 16:19, Lokesh Vutla wrote:
>>>>> From: Balaji T K <balajitk at ti.com>
>>>>>
>>>>> add dra mmc pbias support and ldo1 power on
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Balaji T K <balajitk at ti.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla at ti.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>>    arch/arm/include/asm/arch-omap5/omap.h |    3 ++-
>>>>>    drivers/mmc/omap_hsmmc.c               |   26 ++++++++++++++------------
>>>>>    drivers/power/palmas.c                 |   25 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>>>>    include/configs/omap5_common.h         |    4 ++++
>>>>>    include/configs/omap5_uevm.h           |    5 -----
>>>>>    include/palmas.h                       |    6 +++++-
>>>>>    6 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>> [snip]
>>>>> +	/* set LDO9 TWL6035 to 3V */
>>>> LDO9? TWL6035? If this function is used on the DRA7xx boards only (with
>>>> TPS659038), you should add some comment above.
>>> Ok ll add the comment.
>>>>
>>>>> +	val = 0x2b; /* (3 - 0.9) * 20 + 1 */
>>>> Why not use definitions for the voltage? You could take them from
>>>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/244103/ where some values are
>>>> defined.
>>> Yes, Ill rebase this patch on top of your patch and use those defines.
>> Please be aware that my above mentioned patch has not been reviewed/
>> tested/acked/nacked/whatever by nobody (except possibly a quick look by
>> Nishanth Menon, who had some objections). I wrote it when bringing up a
>> custom OMAP5 board, and most probably it shall not go into mainline in
>> its current form, if ever. I gave it only as an example of how things
>> could be done cleaner. Feel free to use the code as you wish, but I'm
>> afraid that applying it as a patch to your tree and basing upon it might
>> run you into problems when you later sync with mainline.
>>
>> Tom, your opinion?
>
> OK, so at the time it was "nothing will really use this code except test
> functions".  Looks like we have a use for mmc1_ldo9 code at least, so
> lets rework the first patch for adding that + cleanups wrt constants.
Ok. Ill add the first patch + cleanups and resend it.

Thanks,
Lokesh
>