The mmc host controller on the i.mx6q is called usdhc which is redesigned based on the freescale esdhc controller.
The usdhc controller is almost compatible with esdhc except it adds one misc control register from user using experience.
Signed-off-by: Jason Liu jason.hui@linaro.org
drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c | 14 +++++++++++++- 1 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c b/drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c index ec953f0..cd17ef2 100644 --- a/drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c +++ b/drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c @@ -58,7 +58,12 @@ struct fsl_esdhc { uint autoc12err; uint hostcapblt; uint wml;
- char reserved1[8];
+#if defined(CONFIG_FSL_USDHC)
- uint mixctrl;
- char reserved1[4];
+#else
- char reserved1[8];
+#endif
Hi Jason,
can't we just drop this ifdef ?
uint fevt; char reserved2[168]; uint hostver; @@ -298,6 +303,9 @@ esdhc_send_cmd(struct mmc *mmc, struct mmc_cmd *cmd, struct mmc_data *data)
/* Send the command */ esdhc_write32(®s->cmdarg, cmd->cmdarg); +#if defined(CONFIG_FSL_USDHC)
- esdhc_write32(®s->mixctrl, xfertyp & 0xFFFF);
+#endif esdhc_write32(®s->xfertyp, xfertyp);
Why is this duplicated? This seems like a huge user-experience nonsense to me :)
If you write to xfertyp register, you still have to write the same thing to mixctrl? Or if you do it vice versa, won't it work ? Why did you add the register?
/* Wait for the command to complete */ @@ -482,7 +490,11 @@ int fsl_esdhc_initialize(bd_t *bis, struct fsl_esdhc_cfg *cfg)
mmc = malloc(sizeof(struct mmc));
+#if defined(CONFIG_FSL_USDHC)
- sprintf(mmc->name, "FSL_USDHC");
+#else sprintf(mmc->name, "FSL_ESDHC"); +#endif
Why not just rename it to FSL_SDHC and be done with it ?
regs = (struct fsl_esdhc *)cfg->esdhc_base;
/* First reset the eSDHC controller */