Hi Ulf,
On 4/16/2020 5:46 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 at 17:54, Veerabhadrarao Badiganti
<vbadigan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
sdhci-msm controller requires the R1B response for commands that
has this response associated with them.
So enable MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY capability.
I assume this potentially should be considered as fix and tagged for stable?
Yes Stable flag can be applied to this.
Patch with MMC_CAP_WAIT_WHILE_BUSY cap also needed besides this.
Shall I push V2 with stable flag?
Another question, if there is there an upper limit of the busy timeout
in the HW (cmd->busy_timeout) or does the driver use a software
timeout that is adjustable?
The max supported h.w busy timeout value on qcom h/w 21sec.
Kind regards
Uffe
Signed-off-by: Veerabhadrarao Badiganti <vbadigan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
index 013dcea..d826e9b 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
@@ -2088,6 +2088,7 @@ static int sdhci_msm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
}
msm_host->mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_WAIT_WHILE_BUSY;
+ msm_host->mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY;
pm_runtime_get_noresume(&pdev->dev);
pm_runtime_set_active(&pdev->dev);
--
Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc., is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
