On 4/20/20 12:01 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
On Sun, 19 Apr 2020 at 18:52, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sun, Apr 19, 2020 at 09:23:39AM -0700, Sowjanya Komatineni wrote:
On 4/19/20 12:20 AM, Greg KH wrote:
External email: Use caution opening links or attachments
On Fri, Apr 17, 2020 at 12:14:01PM -0700, Sowjanya Komatineni wrote:
This series includes manually backported changes that implements Tegra
specific timeout callback to switch between finite and infinite HW busy
detection wait modes.
sdhci-tegra driver patch implements set_timeout callback based on one of
the sdhci host driver patch that refactors sdhci_set_timeout and allows
drivers to call __sdhci_set_timeout with their timeout callback
implementation.
Both of these patches are manually backported in this series.
Is this a bugfix or a new feature? I can't tell, but it feels like it's
a new feature. What's wrong with just using the 5.4.y kernel tree?
thanks,
greg k-h
Ulf recent patches for increased timeout adds capability
MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY for sdhci-tegra as well.
So, it will always use R1B for R1B type commands so there are no known bugs
or failures with mmc devices we use on our platforms.
I have no idea what this means, sorry.
So, we can treat this patch as an improvement for long operation commands
where HW will wait as long as device is busy.
Ok, so this isn't a regression and can't match the stable kernel rules,
sorry.
Let me help to clarify. This isn't a regression, correct. However, the
patch fixes a long outstanding bug for sdhci-tegra.
For some SD/MMC commands, the mmc core may provide a long busy timeout
trusting the mmc host to cope with it. It has turned out that
sdhci-tegra didn't, thus it may report a cmd-timeout error, while in
fact it shouldn't.
I believe that is what the small series of patches should be addressing.
Kind regards
Uffe
Hi Greg,
Yes, we we don't have failure as of today with mmc devices we are using
on our platforms.
But this is something thats missing from the beginning to handle
commands that takes longer than max host timeout and it may fail if any
operation takes more than max host timeout limit.
So, can we please have this applied to 4.19.113? I will also send
patches to backport for 5.4 and 5.5?
Thanks
Sowjanya
