Shimoda-san, Ulf, On Tue, Feb 14, 2017 at 10:06:47AM +0000, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote: > Hi, > > > From: Wolfram Sang [mailto:wsa+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2017 3:04 AM > > > > After we received the dataend interrupt, R1 response register carries > > the value from the automatically generated stop command. Report that > > info back to the MMC block layer, so we will be notified in case of e.g. > > ECC errors which happened during the last transfer. > > > > Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > I tested this patch with a SD tester (SGDK320). > As the commit log, this patch could pass the R1 response. So, > > Tested-by: Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@xxxxxxxxxxx> Thank you very much for testing! > However, I think the MMC block layer should check the brq->stop.resp[0] > because brq->stop.error should be zero in this case and mmc_blk_cmd_recovery() > is not called in mmc_blk_err_check(). I see. Ulf, do you think it makes sense to extend the condition when to call mmc_blk_cmd_recovery() with checking if stop.resp[0] has one of the R1_* bits set which are marked with 'ex' (and probably 'erx', too)? I agree with Shimoda-san, that the core is a good place to do it, since it is about parsing the R1 and not the status bits of the host hardware. Regards, Wolfram
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
