On Friday, April 26, 2013, Jaehoon Chung wrote: > On 04/26/2013 01:24 PM, Seungwon Jeon wrote: > > On Thursday, April 25, 2013, Joonyoung Shim wrote: > >> On 04/25/2013 09:45 AM, Jaehoon Chung wrote: > >>> On 04/24/2013 12:05 PM, Joonyoung Shim wrote: > >>>> On 04/24/2013 10:34 AM, Seungwon Jeon wrote: > >>>>> On Tuesday, April 23, 2013, Jaehoon Chung wrote: > >>>>>> On 04/23/2013 06:57 PM, Seungwon Jeon wrote: > >>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> On Thursday, April 18, 2013, Joonyoung Shim wrote: > >>>>>>>> If pending interrupt for IDMAC exists when probe, it will call > >>>>>>>> interrupt > >>>>>>>> handler unnecessarily. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Joonyoung Shim <jy0922.s...@samsung.com> > >>>>>>>> --- > >>>>>>>> drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c | 3 +++ > >>>>>>>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c > >>>>>>>> index 323c502..b0057a2 100644 > >>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c > >>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c > >>>>>>>> @@ -2192,6 +2192,7 @@ int dw_mci_probe(struct dw_mci *host) > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> /* Clear the interrupts for the host controller */ > >>>>>>>> mci_writel(host, RINTSTS, 0xFFFFFFFF); > >>>>>>>> + mci_writel(host, IDSTS, 0xFFFFFFFF); > >>>>>>> 0x337 is correct for bits. Could you check the bit filed? > >>>> I feel it's better to use already existing defines than 0x337. > >>>> > >>>>>> I think that don't care which reset value used. > >>>>>> "It is recommended that you write 0xffff_ffff to the Raw Interrupt > >>>>>> register @0x044 and IDSTS > >> @0x8C > >>>>>> in order to clear any pending interrupts before setting the int_enable > >>>>>> bit." > >>>>>> This boot mode case is also used the 0xffff_ffff. > >>>> Jaehoon, can i get this sentence from which document? > >>> That comment is existed at "Synopsys DesignWare Cores mobile storage host > >>> databook". > >>> So we can use the 0xffff_ffff. > >>> > >>> Best Regards, > >>> Jaehoon Chung > >>>>> In case IDSTS all 32bit are not for interrupt status unlike RINTSTS. > >>>>> IDSTS[31:17] is reserved and IDSTS[16:0] also contains 'reserved' and > >>>>> 'read-only' field. > >>>>> Correct use would be needed. > >> > >> I know, but as Jaehoon said, it recommands to write 0xFFFFFFFF "Synopsys > >> DesignWare Cores mobile storage host databook" document, so i also think > >> it's ok. > >> > >> Nevertheless if you want to use strict bits set, i can modify it. What > >> is your idea? > > Jaehoon, > > Thank you for information. I also checked that description, > > but I still feel it doesn't make sense a little bit. > > It seems that manual mentions both RINTSTS and IDSTS at a time while > > focusing the RINTSTS. > > In a general approach, it's expected to touch relevant fields. > Dear Seungwon, > > I don't mind which reset value is used. Then we can use the define macro like > IDSTS_RESET_VALUE. > It's important that reset the IDSTS register to prevent pending interrupt. Sure! I guess Joonyoung will update the patch soon.
Thanks, Seungwon Jeon -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
