On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Stefano Babic <sba...@denx.de> wrote: > On 16/06/2014 02:46, Otavio Salvador wrote: >> There are board were we cannot do voltage negotiation but want to set >> the VSELECT bit forcely to ensure it to work at 1.8V. >> >> This commit adds CONFIG_SYS_FSL_ESDHC_FORCE_VSELECT flag for this use. >> >> Signed-off-by: Otavio Salvador <ota...@ossystems.com.br> >> --- >> >> drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c | 4 ++++ >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c b/drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c >> index c75b38f..b3870e2 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c >> @@ -517,6 +517,10 @@ static int esdhc_init(struct mmc *mmc) >> /* Set timout to the maximum value */ >> esdhc_clrsetbits32(®s->sysctl, SYSCTL_TIMEOUT_MASK, 14 << 16); >> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_SYS_FSL_ESDHC_FORCE_VSELECT >> + esdhc_setbits32(®s->vendorspec, ESDHC_VENDORSPEC_VSELECT); >> +#endif > > Instead of adding a new compiler switch that should be documented (I > have already read Marek's comments), what do you think to extend struct > fsl_esdhc_cfg, putting for exmaple an "options" field with this kind of > specialization ?
I will try to cook something in this direction. -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750 _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
