[U-Boot] [PATCH RFC] OMAP: mmc: add support for second and third mmc channels

Steve Sakoman sakoman at gmail.com
Thu Apr 29 21:55:07 CEST 2010


On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 11:15 AM, Scott Wood <scottwood at freescale.com> wrote:
> Steve Sakoman wrote:
>>
>> This patch adds support for the second and third mmc channels on OMAP3
>> processors
>>
>> Boards wishing to use this feature should define
>> CONFIG_SYS_MMC_SET_DEV in the board config
>>
>> Tested on Overo
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Steve Sakoman <steve at sakoman.com>
>> ---
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-omap3/mmc_host_def.h
>> b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-omap3/mmc_host_def.h
>> index aa751c9..f081b43 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-omap3/mmc_host_def.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/arch-omap3/mmc_host_def.h
>> @@ -31,11 +31,18 @@
>>  typedef struct t2 {
>>        unsigned char res1[0x274];
>>        unsigned int devconf0;          /* 0x274 */
>> -       unsigned char res2[0x2A8];
>> +       unsigned char res2[0x064];
>> +       unsigned int devconf1;          /* 0x2D8 */
>> +       unsigned char res3[0x248];
>>        unsigned int pbias_lite;        /* 0x520 */
>
> This changes the offset of pbias_lite -- 0x64+4+0x248 = 0x2b0, not 0x2a8.
>
> The mandatory use of structs even with large reserved areas seems to invite
> and obscure such issues (and the comments don't help much, since nothing
> ensures they're accurate).

Good catch!

Agreed  -- I really hate sparse structs like this since they just
invite this type of error when you fill in missing registers.

I'll fix and resubmit the patch for further comment.

Steve


More information about the U-Boot mailing list