On 14/12/17 15:09, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: > Errata i834 in AM572x Sitara Processors Silicon Revision 2.0, 1.1 > (SPRZ429K July 2014–Revised March 2017 [1]) mentions > Under high speed HS200 and SDR104 modes, the functional clock for MMC > modules will reach up to 192 MHz. At this frequency, the maximum obtainable > timeout (DTO = 0xE) through MMC host controller is (1/192MHz)*2^27 = 700ms. > Commands taking longer than 700ms may be affected by this small window > frame. Workaround for this errata is use a software timer instead of > hardware timer to provide the delay requested by the upper layer. > > While this errata is specific to AM572x, it is applicable to all sdhci > based controllers when a particular request require timeout greater > than hardware capability. It doesn't work for our controllers. Even if the data timeout interrupt is disabled, it seems like the timeout still "happens" in some fashion - after which the host controller starts misbehaving. So you will need to add a quirk. > > Re-use the software timer already implemented in sdhci to program the > correct timeout value and also disable the hardware timeout when > the required timeout is greater than hardware capabiltiy in order to > avoid spurious timeout interrupts. > > This patch is based on the earlier patch implemented for omap_hsmmc [2] > > [1] -> http://www.ti.com/lit/er/sprz429k/sprz429k.pdf > [2] -> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9791449/ > > Signed-off-by: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@xxxxxx> > --- > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.h | 11 +++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c > index e9290a3439d5..d0655e1d2cc7 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c > @@ -673,6 +673,27 @@ static void sdhci_adma_table_post(struct sdhci_host *host, > } > } > > +static void sdhci_calc_sw_timeout(struct sdhci_host *host, > + struct mmc_command *cmd, > + unsigned int target_timeout) > +{ > + struct mmc_host *mmc = host->mmc; > + struct mmc_ios *ios = &mmc->ios; > + struct mmc_data *data = cmd->data; > + unsigned long long transfer_time; > + > + if (data) { > + transfer_time = MMC_BLOCK_TRANSFER_TIME_MS(data->blksz, > + ios->bus_width, > + ios->clock); If it has a value, actual_clock is better than ios->clock. > + /* calculate timeout for the entire data */ > + host->data_timeout = (data->blocks * (target_timeout + > + transfer_time)); > + } else if (cmd->flags & MMC_RSP_BUSY) { > + host->data_timeout = cmd->busy_timeout * MSEC_PER_SEC; Doesn't need MSEC_PER_SEC multiplier. > + } > +} > + > static u8 sdhci_calc_timeout(struct sdhci_host *host, struct mmc_command *cmd) > { > u8 count; > @@ -732,8 +753,12 @@ static u8 sdhci_calc_timeout(struct sdhci_host *host, struct mmc_command *cmd) > } > > if (count >= 0xF) { > - DBG("Too large timeout 0x%x requested for CMD%d!\n", > - count, cmd->opcode); > + DBG("Too large timeout.. using SW timeout for CMD%d!\n", > + cmd->opcode); > + sdhci_calc_sw_timeout(host, cmd, target_timeout); > + host->ier &= ~SDHCI_INT_DATA_TIMEOUT; > + sdhci_writel(host, host->ier, SDHCI_INT_ENABLE); > + sdhci_writel(host, host->ier, SDHCI_SIGNAL_ENABLE); > count = 0xE; > } > > @@ -1198,6 +1223,14 @@ static void sdhci_finish_command(struct sdhci_host *host) > { > struct mmc_command *cmd = host->cmd; > > + if (host->data_timeout) { > + unsigned long timeout; > + > + timeout = jiffies + > + msecs_to_jiffies(host->data_timeout); > + sdhci_mod_timer(host, host->cmd->mrq, timeout); cmd could be the sbc or a stop cmd or a command during transfer, so this needs more logic. > + } > + > host->cmd = NULL; > > if (cmd->flags & MMC_RSP_PRESENT) { > @@ -2341,6 +2374,10 @@ static bool sdhci_request_done(struct sdhci_host *host) > return true; > } > > + host->data_timeout = 0; > + host->ier |= SDHCI_INT_DATA_TIMEOUT; > + sdhci_writel(host, host->ier, SDHCI_INT_ENABLE); > + sdhci_writel(host, host->ier, SDHCI_SIGNAL_ENABLE); sdhci can have 2 requests in progress to allow for commands to be sent while a data transfer is in progress, so this is not necessarily the data transfer request that is done. Also we want to avoid unnecessary register writes. > sdhci_del_timer(host, mrq); > > /* > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.h b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.h > index 54bc444c317f..e6e0278bea1a 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.h > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.h > @@ -332,6 +332,15 @@ struct sdhci_adma2_64_desc { > /* Allow for a a command request and a data request at the same time */ > #define SDHCI_MAX_MRQS 2 > > +/* > + * Time taken for transferring one block. It is multiplied by a constant > + * factor '2' to account for any errors > + */ > +#define MMC_BLOCK_TRANSFER_TIME_MS(blksz, bus_width, freq) \ > + ((unsigned long long) \ > + (2 * (((blksz) * MSEC_PER_SEC * \ > + (8 / (bus_width))) / (freq)))) I don't think the macro helps make the code more readable. Might just as well write a nice function to calculate the entire data request timeout. > + > enum sdhci_cookie { > COOKIE_UNMAPPED, > COOKIE_PRE_MAPPED, /* mapped by sdhci_pre_req() */ > @@ -546,6 +555,8 @@ struct sdhci_host { > /* Host SDMA buffer boundary. */ > u32 sdma_boundary; > > + unsigned long long data_timeout; msecs_to_jiffies() will truncate to 'unsigned int' anyway, so this might as well be 'unsigned int'. > + > unsigned long private[0] ____cacheline_aligned; > }; > > -- 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
