> Hi Avri,
>
> On 2024-06-02 14:59, Avri Altman wrote:
> >> Hello Avri,
> >>
> >> On 2024-06-02 07:26, Avri Altman wrote:
> >> >> On 2024-05-23 15:20, linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >> >> > From: Daniel Kucera <linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Locked card will not reply to SEND_SCR or SD_STATUS commands so
> >> >> > it was failing to initialize previously. When skipped, the card
> >> >> > will get initialized and CMD42 can be sent using ioctl to unlock
> >> >> > the card or remove password protection.
> >> >> > Until unlocked, all read/write calls will timeout.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Kucera <linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> > ---
> >> >> > drivers/mmc/core/sd.c | 13 ++++++++++++-
> >> >> > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/sd.c b/drivers/mmc/core/sd.c index
> >> >> > 1c8148cdd..ae821df7d 100644
> >> >> > --- a/drivers/mmc/core/sd.c
> >> >> > +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/sd.c
> >> >> > @@ -928,8 +928,19 @@ int mmc_sd_setup_card(struct mmc_host
> >> >> > *host, struct mmc_card *card,
> >> >> > bool reinit)
> >> >> > {
> >> >> > int err;
> >> >> > + u32 card_status;
> >> >> >
> >> >> > - if (!reinit) {
> >> >> > + err = mmc_send_status(card, &card_status);
> >> >> > + if (err){
> >> >> > + pr_err("%s: unable to get card status\n", mmc_hostname(host));
> >> >> > + return err;
> >> >> > + }
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + if (card_status & R1_CARD_IS_LOCKED){
> >> >> > + pr_warn("%s: card is locked\n", mmc_hostname(host));
> >> >> > + }
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + if (!reinit && !(card_status & R1_CARD_IS_LOCKED)) {
> >> >> > /*
> >> >> > * Fetch SCR from card.
> >> >> > */
> >> >>
> >> >> Any feedback please?
> >> > You didn't address my comment from your v1 - Since eMMC & SD shares
> >> > the very same locking feature (non-COP SD that
> >> > is) -
> >> > You should at least explain in your commit log why it isn't an
> >> > issue for eMMC, If indeed it is not.
> >>
> >> I'm sorry, I didn't get what you mean by that. I am touching only the
> >> sd.c code, not the mmc.c (where eMMC is initialized, am I correct?).
> >> How should I address this?
> >> Should I test with eMMC to SD adaptor? I don't have any currently.
> > Theoretically, looking in the eMMC spec, a locked eMMC device
> > shouldn't have any issue returning from power down.
> > The only flow that is affected is that its not allowed to switch to
> > hs200 in a locked state until unlocked - not to say that it is a
> > problem.
> > If you can't verify that via code review, can you test your mmc-utils
> > code on an eMMC platform?
>
> I've just tested with an eMMC to SD adapter in my reader and it is detected
> correctly:
>
> [1463181.072006] mmc1: unexpected status 0x2000900 after switch
> [1463181.074560] mmc1: unexpected status 0x2000900 after switch
> [1463181.077038] mmc1: unexpected status 0x2000900 after switch
> [1463181.079709] mmc1: unexpected status 0x2000900 after switch
> [1463181.081972] mmc1: unexpected status 0x2000900 after switch
> [1463181.083412] mmc1: unexpected status 0x2000900 after switch
> [1463181.084831] mmc1: unexpected status 0x2000900 after switch
> [1463181.084836] mmc1: new high speed MMC card at address 0001
> [1463181.085195] mmcblk1: mmc1:0001 004GA0 2.59 GiB
>
> Do I need to do some changes to the patch?
Just add one more line to your commit log saying that no similar attention is needed for eMMC because....
Thanks,
Avri
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Avri
> >>
> >> I am sorry if these are stupid questions, I am a layman.
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Avri
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> D.
> >>
> >> Thank you.
> >> Daniel.
>
> Thank you,
> Daniel
