Re: [PATCH v10] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



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;
>
>


-- 
Sent by consultant of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Media]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux