generic: bacport SPI bus locking API

SVN-Revision: 22862

1 files changed, 143 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/target/linux/generic/patches-2.6.34/911-backport-mmc_spi-use-spi-bus-locking-api.patch b/target/linux/generic/patches-2.6.34/911-backport-mmc_spi-use-spi-bus-locking-api.patch
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d6ad3d4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/target/linux/generic/patches-2.6.34/911-backport-mmc_spi-use-spi-bus-locking-api.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,143 @@
+From 4751c1c74bc7b596db5de0c93be1a22a570145c0 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: Ernst Schwab <eschwab@online.de>
+Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 12:47:46 +0100
+Subject: [PATCH] spi/mmc_spi: mmc_spi adaptations for SPI bus locking API
+
+Modification of the mmc_spi driver to use the SPI bus locking API.
+With this, the mmc_spi driver can be used together with other SPI
+devices on the same SPI bus. The exclusive access to the SPI bus is
+now managed in the SPI layer. The counting of chip selects in the probe
+function is no longer needed.
+
+Signed-off-by: Ernst Schwab <eschwab@online.de>
+Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>
+Tested-by: Matt Fleming <matt@console-pimps.org>
+Tested-by: Antonio Ospite <ospite@studenti.unina.it>
+---
+ drivers/mmc/host/mmc_spi.c |   59 ++++++++-----------------------------------
+ 1 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 48 deletions(-)
+
+--- a/drivers/mmc/host/mmc_spi.c
++++ b/drivers/mmc/host/mmc_spi.c
+@@ -182,7 +182,7 @@ mmc_spi_readbytes(struct mmc_spi_host *h
+ 				host->data_dma, sizeof(*host->data),
+ 				DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
+ 
+-	status = spi_sync(host->spi, &host->readback);
++	status = spi_sync_locked(host->spi, &host->readback);
+ 
+ 	if (host->dma_dev)
+ 		dma_sync_single_for_cpu(host->dma_dev,
+@@ -541,7 +541,7 @@ mmc_spi_command_send(struct mmc_spi_host
+ 				host->data_dma, sizeof(*host->data),
+ 				DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
+ 	}
+-	status = spi_sync(host->spi, &host->m);
++	status = spi_sync_locked(host->spi, &host->m);
+ 
+ 	if (host->dma_dev)
+ 		dma_sync_single_for_cpu(host->dma_dev,
+@@ -685,7 +685,7 @@ mmc_spi_writeblock(struct mmc_spi_host *
+ 				host->data_dma, sizeof(*scratch),
+ 				DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
+ 
+-	status = spi_sync(spi, &host->m);
++	status = spi_sync_locked(spi, &host->m);
+ 
+ 	if (status != 0) {
+ 		dev_dbg(&spi->dev, "write error (%d)\n", status);
+@@ -822,7 +822,7 @@ mmc_spi_readblock(struct mmc_spi_host *h
+ 				DMA_FROM_DEVICE);
+ 	}
+ 
+-	status = spi_sync(spi, &host->m);
++	status = spi_sync_locked(spi, &host->m);
+ 
+ 	if (host->dma_dev) {
+ 		dma_sync_single_for_cpu(host->dma_dev,
+@@ -1018,7 +1018,7 @@ mmc_spi_data_do(struct mmc_spi_host *hos
+ 					host->data_dma, sizeof(*scratch),
+ 					DMA_BIDIRECTIONAL);
+ 
+-		tmp = spi_sync(spi, &host->m);
++		tmp = spi_sync_locked(spi, &host->m);
+ 
+ 		if (host->dma_dev)
+ 			dma_sync_single_for_cpu(host->dma_dev,
+@@ -1084,6 +1084,9 @@ static void mmc_spi_request(struct mmc_h
+ 	}
+ #endif
+ 
++	/* request exclusive bus access */
++	spi_bus_lock(host->spi->master);
++
+ 	/* issue command; then optionally data and stop */
+ 	status = mmc_spi_command_send(host, mrq, mrq->cmd, mrq->data != NULL);
+ 	if (status == 0 && mrq->data) {
+@@ -1094,6 +1097,9 @@ static void mmc_spi_request(struct mmc_h
+ 			mmc_cs_off(host);
+ 	}
+ 
++	/* release the bus */
++	spi_bus_unlock(host->spi->master);
++
+ 	mmc_request_done(host->mmc, mrq);
+ }
+ 
+@@ -1290,23 +1296,6 @@ mmc_spi_detect_irq(int irq, void *mmc)
+ 	return IRQ_HANDLED;
+ }
+ 
+-struct count_children {
+-	unsigned	n;
+-	struct bus_type	*bus;
+-};
+-
+-static int maybe_count_child(struct device *dev, void *c)
+-{
+-	struct count_children *ccp = c;
+-
+-	if (dev->bus == ccp->bus) {
+-		if (ccp->n)
+-			return -EBUSY;
+-		ccp->n++;
+-	}
+-	return 0;
+-}
+-
+ static int mmc_spi_probe(struct spi_device *spi)
+ {
+ 	void			*ones;
+@@ -1338,32 +1327,6 @@ static int mmc_spi_probe(struct spi_devi
+ 		return status;
+ 	}
+ 
+-	/* We can use the bus safely iff nobody else will interfere with us.
+-	 * Most commands consist of one SPI message to issue a command, then
+-	 * several more to collect its response, then possibly more for data
+-	 * transfer.  Clocking access to other devices during that period will
+-	 * corrupt the command execution.
+-	 *
+-	 * Until we have software primitives which guarantee non-interference,
+-	 * we'll aim for a hardware-level guarantee.
+-	 *
+-	 * REVISIT we can't guarantee another device won't be added later...
+-	 */
+-	if (spi->master->num_chipselect > 1) {
+-		struct count_children cc;
+-
+-		cc.n = 0;
+-		cc.bus = spi->dev.bus;
+-		status = device_for_each_child(spi->dev.parent, &cc,
+-				maybe_count_child);
+-		if (status < 0) {
+-			dev_err(&spi->dev, "can't share SPI bus\n");
+-			return status;
+-		}
+-
+-		dev_warn(&spi->dev, "ASSUMING SPI bus stays unshared!\n");
+-	}
+-
+ 	/* We need a supply of ones to transmit.  This is the only time
+ 	 * the CPU touches these, so cache coherency isn't a concern.
+ 	 *