On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 10:37:12AM +0100, Pierre Ossman wrote:
> Russell King wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 07:40:26AM +0100, Pierre Ossman wrote:
> >> I noticed that a new transfer flag was recently added to the MMC layer
> >> without any immediate users, the MMC_DATA_MULTI flag. I'm guessing the
> >> purpose of the flag is to indicate the difference between
> >> MMC_READ_SINGLE_BLOCK and MMC_READ_MULTIPLE_BLOCKS with just one block.
> >> If so, then that should probably be mentioned in a comment somewhere.
> >>
> >
> > There are hosts out there (Atmel AT91-based) which need to know if the
> > transfer is going to be multiple block. Rather than have them test
> > the op-code (which is what they're already doing), we provide a flag
> > instead.
>
> As far as the hardware is concerned there are two "multi-block" transfers:
>
> * Multiple, back-to-back blocks.
> * One or more blocks that need to be terminated by some form of stop
> command.
>
> The first can be identified by checking the number of blocks in the
> request, the latter is harder to identify since it's a protocol semantic
> (it could be just one block, but still need a stop). Does MMC_DATA_MULTI
> indicate the latter, former or both?
In short, it's defined to be whatever AT91_MCI_TRTYP_MULTIPLE means in
the AT91RM9200 MMC host driver, which appears to be set for any of the
multiple block commands. They currently are doing:
+static const u32 commands[64] = {
+ /* Class 1 (0) */
+ MMC_GO_IDLE_STATE,
+ MMC_SEND_OP_COND | AT91_MCI_RSPTYP_48,
+ MMC_ALL_SEND_CID | AT91_MCI_RSPTYP_136,
+ MMC_SET_RELATIVE_ADDR | AT91_MCI_RSPTYP_48 | AT91_MCI_MAXLAT,
+ MMC_SET_DSR | AT91_MCI_MAXLAT,
...
+ MMC_READ_SINGLE_BLOCK | AT91_MCI_RSPTYP_48 | AT91_MCI_MAXLAT | AT91_MCI_TRDIR | AT91_MCI_TRCMD_START | AT91_MCI_TRTYP_BLOCK,
+ MMC_READ_MULTIPLE_BLOCK | AT91_MCI_RSPTYP_48 | AT91_MCI_MAXLAT | AT91_MCI_TRDIR | AT91_MCI_TRCMD_START | AT91_MCI_TRTYP_MULTIPLE,
...
+ MMC_WRITE_BLOCK | AT91_MCI_RSPTYP_48 | AT91_MCI_MAXLAT | AT91_MCI_TRCMD_START | AT91_MCI_TRTYP_BLOCK,
+ MMC_WRITE_MULTIPLE_BLOCK| AT91_MCI_RSPTYP_48 | AT91_MCI_MAXLAT | AT91_MCI_TRCMD_START | AT91_MCI_TRTYP_MULTIPLE,
and using that as a lookup table by command for the value to put into
the command register. I want to eliminate that, and not passing the
MULTI flag prevents elimination of this table.
--
Russell King
Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/
maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
