On Thursday, January 31, 2013, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
> On 01/31/2013 05:42 PM, Subhash Jadavani wrote:
> > On 1/22/2013 5:48 PM, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
> >> When card removed, then didn't complete the previously data.
> >> (It didn't wakeup any interrupt.)
> >> If card is removed, then we can assume to complete the previously data.
> >> And wakeup the interrupt for wait_event of data.
> >>
> >> This problem is produced when sd-card is removed.(Sd-card is running some operation)
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <Kyungmin.park@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> >> 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
> >> index 8b3a122..bc1d627 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
> >> @@ -515,17 +515,26 @@ struct mmc_async_req *mmc_start_req(struct mmc_host *host,
> >> mmc_pre_req(host, areq->mrq, !host->areq);
> >> if (host->areq) {
> >> - err = mmc_wait_for_data_req_done(host, host->areq->mrq,
> >> - areq);
> >> - if (err == MMC_BLK_NEW_REQUEST) {
> >> - if (error)
> >> - *error = err;
> >> - /*
> >> - * The previous request was not completed,
> >> - * nothing to return
> >> - */
> >> - return NULL;
> >> - }
> >> + err = mmc_wait_for_data_req_done(host, host->areq->mrq,
> >> + areq);
> >> + if (err == MMC_BLK_NEW_REQUEST) {
> >> + if (error)
> >> + *error = err;
> >> + /*
> >> + * The previous request was not completed,
> >> + * nothing to return
> >> + */
> >> + return NULL;
> >> + } else if (err == MMC_BLK_NOMEDIUM && areq) {
> >> + struct mmc_context_info *ctnx = &host->context_info;
> >> + /*
> >> + * If crad is removed,
> >> + * then we didn't wait for data completed.
> >> + * Assume that data-recieve done.
> >> + */
> >> + ctnx->is_done_rcv = true;
> >> + wake_up_interruptible(&ctnx->wait);
> >
> > Can you please explain more on what exactly we are trying to do here (may be you can list down the
> call flow)? I am not sure if i understood this correctly. But why would you need to wakeup the thread
> here? We are here because thread is already woken up. mmc_wait_for_data_req_done() would return only
> if either the new request is received or the currently running request on controller is completed.
> This problem is produced when card is removed and running some operation.
> If card is removed, mmc_wait_for_data_req_done() is returned error, right?
> But if there was async request and running async operation, then maybe run mmc_start_request() with
> areq.
> controller is waiting "_for_req_data_done_" for areq.
>
> If request is host->areq.process is running at this time.
> But if request is areq(prepared request), then mmc_wait_for_data_req_done should be pending.
> and system is dead-lock.
I also found this problem with sdcard.
I think it can be solved easily. Did you see the following patch?
[PATCH 1/2] mmc: core: fix permanent sleep of mmcqd during card removal
We may just get the hint from __mmc_start_req function.
Thanks,
Seungwon Jeon
>
> Best Regards,
> Jaehoon Chung
>
> >
> > Regards,
> > Subhash
> >
> >> + }
> >> /*
> >> * Check BKOPS urgency for each R1 response
> >> */
> >
> > --
> > 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
> >
>
> --
> 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
--
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
