On Wed, Feb 07, 2018 at 10:52:52PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 02:39:04PM +0100, Simon Horman wrote: > > From: Masaharu Hayakawa <masaharu.hayakawa.ry@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > If the return value of mmc_send_tuning() is error other than -EILSEQ, the > > tuning fails and process goes out of for_loop. But the correct processing > > is to judge their TAP as bad. > > Ideally, we would have more specific reasons why this is correct processing. > > What other codes could happen here? I mistakenly attached log below following to patch 2/3 rather than 1/3 (this patch) which explains my reason for including this patch in the series. However, I am no longer able to reproduce this problem - I tried to do so in order to work out which errors were being handled differently with and without the patch. I think we can drop this patch for now. * M3-W ES1.0 / Salvator-X [ 1.812758] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee100000.sd: Got CD GPIO [ 1.818778] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee100000.sd: Got WP GPIO [ 1.874951] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee140000.sd: mmc0 base at 0xee140000 +max clock rate 200 MHz [ 1.884950] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee160000.sd: Got CD GPIO [ 1.891088] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee160000.sd: Got WP GPIO [ 2.083508] mmc0: new HS400 MMC card at address 0001 [ 2.084827] mmcblk0: mmc0:0001 eMMC 28.8 GiB [ 2.085234] mmcblk0boot0: mmc0:0001 eMMC partition 1 4.00 MiB [ 2.085727] mmcblk0boot1: mmc0:0001 eMMC partition 2 4.00 MiB [ 2.086398] mmcblk0rpmb: mmc0:0001 eMMC partition 3 4.00 MiB, chardev +(243:0) [ 2.097926] mmcblk0: p1 [ 2.360533] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee100000.sd: Got CD GPIO [ 2.367633] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee100000.sd: Got WP GPIO [ 2.424700] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee100000.sd: mmc1 base at 0xee100000 +max clock rate 200 MHz [ 2.436021] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee160000.sd: Got CD GPIO [ 2.443100] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee160000.sd: Got WP GPIO * On H3 ES2.0 / Salvator-XS: [ 2.452354] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee100000.sd: Got CD GPIO [ 2.458344] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee100000.sd: Got WP GPIO [ 2.513917] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee140000.sd: mmc0 base at 0xee140000 +max clock rate 200 MHz [ 2.523564] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee160000.sd: Got CD GPIO [ 2.529559] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee160000.sd: Got WP GPIO [ 2.636678] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee140000.sd: Tuning procedure failed [ 2.643739] mmc0: tuning execution failed: -5 [ 2.648211] mmc0: error -5 whilst initialising MMC card [ 2.730078] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee140000.sd: Tuning procedure failed [ 2.730085] mmc0: tuning execution failed: -5 [ 2.730093] mmc0: error -5 whilst initialising MMC card [ 2.858718] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee140000.sd: Tuning procedure failed [ 2.858725] mmc0: tuning execution failed: -5 [ 2.858733] mmc0: error -5 whilst initialising MMC card [ 2.991258] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee100000.sd: Got CD GPIO [ 2.998333] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee100000.sd: Got WP GPIO [ 3.063121] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee140000.sd: Tuning procedure failed [ 3.063128] mmc0: tuning execution failed: -5 [ 3.063135] mmc0: error -5 whilst initialising MMC card [ 3.085170] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee160000.sd: Got CD GPIO [ 3.092222] renesas_sdhi_internal_dmac ee160000.sd: Got WP GPIO > > > Signed-off-by: Masaharu Hayakawa <masaharu.hayakawa.ry@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > v2 [Simon Horman] > > * Added to patchset targeted at upstream > > * Minor revision of changelog > > > > v0 [Masaharu Hayakawa] > > --- > > drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_core.c | 5 +---- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_core.c b/drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_core.c > > index 6d8719be75a8..41767d33ef97 100644 > > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_core.c > > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_core.c > > @@ -800,10 +800,7 @@ static int tmio_mmc_execute_tuning(struct mmc_host *mmc, u32 opcode) > > if (host->prepare_tuning) > > host->prepare_tuning(host, i % host->tap_num); > > > > - ret = mmc_send_tuning(mmc, opcode, NULL); > > - if (ret && ret != -EILSEQ) > > - goto out; > > - if (ret == 0) > > + if (!mmc_send_tuning(mmc, opcode, NULL)) > > I'd prefer (mmc_send_tuning() == 0) here instead of '!mmc_send_tuning()'. > This reads as 'is ok' while the other reads more 'if not ok'. > > > set_bit(i, host->taps); > > > > usleep_range(1000, 1200); > > -- > > 2.11.0 > >
