| Message ID | 500654A7.8010501@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Tue, July 17, 2012 11:16 pm, Adrian Hunter wrote: > On 17/07/12 15:58, Jaehoon Chung wrote: >> On 07/17/2012 09:30 PM, Adrian Hunter wrote: >>> On 17/07/12 05:44, Jaehoon Chung wrote: >>> >>> <snip> >>> >>>> +/** >>>> + * mmc_start_bkops - start BKOPS for supported cards >>>> + * @card: MMC card to start BKOPS >>>> + * >>>> + * Start background operations whenever requested. >>>> + * when the urgent BKOPS bit is set in a R1 command response >>>> + * then background operations should be started immediately. >>>> +*/ >>>> +void mmc_start_bkops(struct mmc_card *card) >>>> +{ >>>> + int err; >>>> + int timeout; >>>> + u8 use_busy_signal; >>>> + >>>> + BUG_ON(!card); >>>> + if (!card->ext_csd.bkops_en || !(card->host->caps2 & >>>> MMC_CAP2_BKOPS)) >>>> + return; >>>> + >>>> + if (mmc_is_exception_event(card, EXT_CSD_URGENT_BKOPS)) >>>> + if (card->ext_csd.raw_bkops_status) >>>> + mmc_card_set_need_bkops(card); >>>> + >>>> + /* >>>> + * If card is already doing bkops or need for >>>> + * bkops flag is not set, then do nothing just >>>> + * return >>>> + */ >>>> + if (mmc_card_doing_bkops(card) || !mmc_card_need_bkops(card)) >>>> + return; >>>> + >>>> + mmc_claim_host(card->host); >>>> + if (card->ext_csd.raw_bkops_status >= EXT_CSD_BKOPS_LEVEL_2) { >>>> + timeout = MMC_BKOPS_MAX_TIMEOUT; >>>> + use_busy_signal = 0; >>>> + } else { >>>> + timeout = 0; >>>> + use_busy_signal = 1; >>>> + } >>> >>> Is this the right way around? >> >> use the mmc_switch() with R1B.. >> this case is no problem, because after sending bkops, repeat the >> checking card status until prg-done. >> But, at sdhci controller, be occurred data timeout error. >> Because response type is r1b, and timeout value is too large. >> (Actually, i think that is controller's problem..but just its my test >> environment.) >> >> if other sdhci controller working well with R1b, use_busy_signal need >> not. >> Just use the mmc_switch(). >> >> But When running bkops level2/3 use with R1 type, also no problem. >> Because the also checking status in mmc_switch() until prg-done. > > You added: > > + /* > + * For urgent bkops status (LEVEL_2 and more) > + * bkops executed synchronously, otherwise > + * the operation is in progress > + */ > + if (card->ext_csd.raw_bkops_status < EXT_CSD_BKOPS_LEVEL_2) > + mmc_card_set_doing_bkops(card); > > But: > status < 2 => use_busy_signal = 1 > use_busy_signal = 1 => waiting > waiting => the operation is NOT in progress > > Hence my question: Is this the right way around? Good catch. in mmc_start_bkops, use_busy_signal should be set to 1 in case card->ext_csd.raw_bkops_status >= EXT_CSD_BKOPS_LEVEL_2 > > Also this change is needed for the addition of 'use_busy_signal' to > mmc_switch: > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c b/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c > index baf90e0..e202a5e 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c > @@ -417,7 +417,7 @@ int __mmc_switch(struct mmc_card *card, u8 set, u8 > index, u8 value, > err = mmc_send_status(card, &status); > if (err) > return err; > - if (card->host->caps & MMC_CAP_WAIT_WHILE_BUSY) > + if (use_busy_signal && (card->host->caps & > MMC_CAP_WAIT_WHILE_BUSY)) > break; > if (mmc_host_is_spi(card->host)) > break; > >
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c b/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c index baf90e0..e202a5e 100644 --- a/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c @@ -417,7 +417,7 @@ int __mmc_switch(struct mmc_card *card, u8 set, u8 index, u8 value, err = mmc_send_status(card, &status); if (err) return err; - if (card->host->caps & MMC_CAP_WAIT_WHILE_BUSY) + if (use_busy_signal && (card->host->caps & MMC_CAP_WAIT_WHILE_BUSY)) break; if (mmc_host_is_spi(card->host)) break;