On 5/03/19 4:59 AM, Yinbo Zhu wrote:
> From: Yinbo Zhu <yinbo.zhu@xxxxxxx>
>
> eSDHC-A001: The data timeout counter (SYSCTL[DTOCV]) is not
> reliable for DTOCV values 0x4(2^17 SD clock), 0x8(2^21 SD clock),
> and 0xC(2^25 SD clock). The data timeout counter can count from
> 2^13–2^27, but for values 2^17, 2^21, and 2^25, the timeout
> counter counts for only 2^13 SD clocks.
> A-008358: The data timeout counter value loaded into the timeout
> counter is less than expected and can result into early timeout
> error in case of eSDHC data transactions. The table below shows
> the expected vs actual timeout period for different values of
> SYSCTL[DTOCV]:
> these two erratum has the same quirk to control it, and set
> SDHCI_QUIRK_RESET_AFTER_REQUEST to fix above issue.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yinbo Zhu <yinbo.zhu@xxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c | 4 +++-
> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c
> index 9da53e5..1ac1133 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c
> @@ -1074,8 +1074,10 @@ static int sdhci_esdhc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> if (esdhc->vendor_ver > VENDOR_V_22)
> host->quirks &= ~SDHCI_QUIRK_NO_BUSY_IRQ;
>
> - if (of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "fsl,p2020-esdhc"))
> + if (of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "fsl,p2020-esdhc")) {
> host->quirks2 |= SDHCI_QUIRK_RESET_AFTER_REQUEST;
> + host->quirks2 |= SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_TIMEOUT_VAL;
> + }
>
> if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,p5040-esdhc") ||
> of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,p5020-esdhc") ||
>
