On Thu, July 19, 2012 8:12 am, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
> +void mmc_start_bkops(struct mmc_card *card, bool from_exception)
> +{
> + int err;
> + int timeout;
> + bool use_busy_signal;
> +
> + BUG_ON(!card);
> +
> + if (!card->ext_csd.bkops_en || mmc_card_doing_bkops(card) ||
> + !(card->host->caps2 & MMC_CAP2_BKOPS))
> + return;
To my opinion, the host cannot decide not to support BKOPs if it is
enabled by the card. In such a case, the card will expect the host to
start the BKOPs and may get into performance degradation.
I think the MMC_CAP2_BKOPS should be removed.
Does everyone agree or do I miss something?
> @@ -489,6 +568,53 @@ int mmc_wait_for_cmd(struct mmc_host *host, struct
> mmc_command *cmd, int retries
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(mmc_wait_for_cmd);
>
> /**
> + * mmc_stop_bkops - stop ongoing BKOPS
> + * @card: MMC card to check BKOPS
> + *
> + * Send HPI command to stop ongoing background operations,
> + * to allow rapid servicing of foreground operations,e.g. read/
> + * writes. Wait until the card comes out of the programming state
> + * to avoid errors in servicing read/write requests.
> + */
> +int mmc_stop_bkops(struct mmc_card *card)
> +{
> + int err = 0;
> +
> + BUG_ON(!card);
> + err = mmc_interrupt_hpi(card);
> +
> + /*
> + * if err is EINVAL, it's status that can't issue HPI.
> + * it should complete the BKOPS.
> + */
> + if (!err || (err == -EINVAL)) {
> + mmc_card_clr_doing_bkops(card);
> + err = 0;
> + }
I don't understand the comment regarding the case where err equals
-EINVAL. Can you please explain it?
> @@ -392,13 +393,25 @@ int mmc_switch(struct mmc_card *card, u8 set, u8
> index, u8 value,
> (index << 16) |
> (value << 8) |
> set;
> - cmd.flags = MMC_RSP_SPI_R1B | MMC_RSP_R1B | MMC_CMD_AC;
> + cmd.flags = MMC_CMD_AC;
> + if (use_busy_signal)
> + cmd.flags |= MMC_RSP_SPI_R1B | MMC_RSP_R1B;
> + else
> + cmd.flags |= MMC_RSP_SPI_R1 | MMC_RSP_R1;
> +
> +
> cmd.cmd_timeout_ms = timeout_ms;
>
> err = mmc_wait_for_cmd(card->host, &cmd, MMC_CMD_RETRIES);
> if (err)
> return err;
>
> + /*
> + * No need to check card status in case of BKOPS LEVEL1 switch
> + */
Change the comment to be general (don't mention BKOPs level 1), something
like:
No need to check card status in case of unblocking command.
Also, 1 line comment should be /* comment */
Thanks,
Maya
--
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
