From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B1EDC04AAF for ; Tue, 21 May 2019 09:18:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDE202173E for ; Tue, 21 May 2019 09:18:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=st.com header.i=@st.com header.b="zu0FNCpQ" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726562AbfEUJSA (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 May 2019 05:18:00 -0400 Received: from mx08-00178001.pphosted.com ([91.207.212.93]:40872 "EHLO mx07-00178001.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726006AbfEUJSA (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 May 2019 05:18:00 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0046661.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx08-00178001.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x4L96iJ0014021; Tue, 21 May 2019 11:17:51 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=st.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=STMicroelectronics; bh=4RTuKGHCLsvh6APcX9ZvfmHkgHj7OwihyknGBu1Dl3k=; b=zu0FNCpQ3k5YZ+Hsbbr3+WOhETEEI/gIOo8/DQQg6XhVOH+wQN5fmQxRdPoCRMQl5YHP BXFwqOgCQeT/O3uvkr/R1btmto74WK/L9rN8UnYKQwZC6LfYnCeswjgmf0wBmOOQ72ir HTGEDPHbl3+VDiPOrxUgouddIuxMgctnPwiTu5l9Ssm+sdJOvMDGmYaWJCNFq/8AP21Y NRJfA5saQo7a+yG5I5A4LjLOrqk74BBnHvNZfK2ealDkR4PahOAymzNzuVwKd1LkSaDJ T881Rf3ep8OKCnHgANMCr9YhMkR7PBygemChfoWMJoXEYrd+Rz/tnM6pM3JXW+ZSRigb VQ== Received: from beta.dmz-eu.st.com (beta.dmz-eu.st.com [164.129.1.35]) by mx08-00178001.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2sj8xg8bpr-1 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 21 May 2019 11:17:51 +0200 Received: from zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (zeta.dmz-eu.st.com [164.129.230.9]) by beta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 4ECC531; Tue, 21 May 2019 09:17:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from Webmail-eu.st.com (sfhdag6node1.st.com [10.75.127.16]) by zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 1DB7C24EC; Tue, 21 May 2019 09:17:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [10.48.0.237] (10.75.127.44) by SFHDAG6NODE1.st.com (10.75.127.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1347.2; Tue, 21 May 2019 11:17:49 +0200 Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 0/5] mmc: mmci: add busy detect for stm32 sdmmc variant To: Ulf Hansson CC: Rob Herring , Srinivas Kandagatla , Maxime Coquelin , Alexandre Torgue , Linux ARM , Linux Kernel Mailing List , DTML , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" , References: <1556264798-18540-1-git-send-email-ludovic.Barre@st.com> <74b91eb4-e5a3-38b2-f732-29cdd058eb6a@st.com> From: Ludovic BARRE Message-ID: <7e15c8ec-f851-b0d3-a3ce-dfad2a398e78@st.com> Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 11:17:48 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.75.127.44] X-ClientProxiedBy: SFHDAG3NODE1.st.com (10.75.127.7) To SFHDAG6NODE1.st.com (10.75.127.16) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2019-05-21_01:,, signatures=0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 5/21/19 9:56 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On Tue, 21 May 2019 at 09:38, Ludovic BARRE wrote: >> >> hi Ulf >> >> Just a "gentleman ping" about the rest of series. >> "mmc: mmci: add busy detect for stm32 sdmmc variant" > > Thanks! > > It's been a busy period and I am currently traveling. My plan is to > look at in detail beginning of next week when get back home. I hope > that's okay. yes, I understand, it's just to not forget me :-) > > Kind regards > Uffe > >> >> Regards >> Ludo >> >> On 5/3/19 3:29 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 at 14:06, Ludovic BARRE wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 4/30/19 1:13 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 at 09:46, Ludovic Barre wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> From: Ludovic Barre >>>>>> >>>>>> This patch series adds busy detect for stm32 sdmmc variant. >>>>>> Some adaptations are required: >>>>>> -Avoid to check and poll busy status when is not expected. >>>>>> -Clear busy status bit if busy_detect_flag and busy_detect_mask are >>>>>> different. >>>>>> -Add hardware busy timeout with MMCIDATATIMER register. >>>>>> >>>>>> V2: >>>>>> -mmci_cmd_irq cleanup in separate patch. >>>>>> -simplify the busy_detect_flag exclude >>>>>> -replace sdmmc specific comment in >>>>>> "mmc: mmci: avoid fake busy polling in mmci_irq" >>>>>> to focus on common behavior >>>>>> >>>>>> Ludovic Barre (5): >>>>>> mmc: mmci: cleanup mmci_cmd_irq for busy detect feature >>>>>> mmc: mmci: avoid fake busy polling in mmci_irq >>>>>> mmc: mmci: fix clear of busy detect status >>>>>> mmc: mmci: add hardware busy timeout feature >>>>>> mmc: mmci: add busy detect for stm32 sdmmc variant >>>>>> >>>>>> drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>>> drivers/mmc/host/mmci.h | 3 +++ >>>>>> 2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 2.7.4 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Ludovic, just wanted to let you know that I am reviewing and testing >>>>> this series. >>>>> >>>>> However, while running some tests on Ux500 for validating the busy >>>>> detection code, even without your series applied, I encounter some odd >>>>> behaviors. I am looking into the problem to understand better and will >>>>> let you know as soon as I have some more data to share. >>>> >>>> Oops, don't hesitate to share your status, if I could help. >>> >>> Thanks! Good and bad news here, then. >>> >>> I now understand what is going on - and there is certainly room for >>> improvements here, but more importantly the actual mmci busy detection >>> works as expected. >>> >>> When it comes to improvements, the main issue I have found is how we >>> treat DATA WRITES. In many cases we simply don't use the HW busy >>> detection at all, but instead rely on the mmc core to send CMD13 in a >>> loop to poll. Well, then if the polling would have consisted of a >>> couple of CMD13s that wouldn't be an issue, but my observations is >>> rather that the numbers of CMD13 sent to poll is in the range or >>> hundreds/thousands - per each WRITE request! >>> >>> I am going to send a patch (or two) that improves the behavior. It >>> might even involve changing parts in core layer, not sure how the end >>> result will look like yet. >>> >>> In any case, I have applied patch 1 and patch2 for next, as the tests >>> turned out well at my side. I also took the liberty of updating some >>> of the comments/changelogs, please have look and tell if there is >>> something you want to change. >>> >>> I will continue with the rest of series next week. >>> >>> Kind regards >>> Uffe >>> From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ludovic BARRE Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 0/5] mmc: mmci: add busy detect for stm32 sdmmc variant Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 11:17:48 +0200 Message-ID: <7e15c8ec-f851-b0d3-a3ce-dfad2a398e78@st.com> References: <1556264798-18540-1-git-send-email-ludovic.Barre@st.com> <74b91eb4-e5a3-38b2-f732-29cdd058eb6a@st.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Ulf Hansson Cc: Rob Herring , Srinivas Kandagatla , Maxime Coquelin , Alexandre Torgue , Linux ARM , Linux Kernel Mailing List , DTML , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" , linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 5/21/19 9:56 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On Tue, 21 May 2019 at 09:38, Ludovic BARRE wrote: >> >> hi Ulf >> >> Just a "gentleman ping" about the rest of series. >> "mmc: mmci: add busy detect for stm32 sdmmc variant" > > Thanks! > > It's been a busy period and I am currently traveling. My plan is to > look at in detail beginning of next week when get back home. I hope > that's okay. yes, I understand, it's just to not forget me :-) > > Kind regards > Uffe > >> >> Regards >> Ludo >> >> On 5/3/19 3:29 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 at 14:06, Ludovic BARRE wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 4/30/19 1:13 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 at 09:46, Ludovic Barre wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> From: Ludovic Barre >>>>>> >>>>>> This patch series adds busy detect for stm32 sdmmc variant. >>>>>> Some adaptations are required: >>>>>> -Avoid to check and poll busy status when is not expected. >>>>>> -Clear busy status bit if busy_detect_flag and busy_detect_mask are >>>>>> different. >>>>>> -Add hardware busy timeout with MMCIDATATIMER register. >>>>>> >>>>>> V2: >>>>>> -mmci_cmd_irq cleanup in separate patch. >>>>>> -simplify the busy_detect_flag exclude >>>>>> -replace sdmmc specific comment in >>>>>> "mmc: mmci: avoid fake busy polling in mmci_irq" >>>>>> to focus on common behavior >>>>>> >>>>>> Ludovic Barre (5): >>>>>> mmc: mmci: cleanup mmci_cmd_irq for busy detect feature >>>>>> mmc: mmci: avoid fake busy polling in mmci_irq >>>>>> mmc: mmci: fix clear of busy detect status >>>>>> mmc: mmci: add hardware busy timeout feature >>>>>> mmc: mmci: add busy detect for stm32 sdmmc variant >>>>>> >>>>>> drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>>> drivers/mmc/host/mmci.h | 3 +++ >>>>>> 2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 2.7.4 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Ludovic, just wanted to let you know that I am reviewing and testing >>>>> this series. >>>>> >>>>> However, while running some tests on Ux500 for validating the busy >>>>> detection code, even without your series applied, I encounter some odd >>>>> behaviors. I am looking into the problem to understand better and will >>>>> let you know as soon as I have some more data to share. >>>> >>>> Oops, don't hesitate to share your status, if I could help. >>> >>> Thanks! Good and bad news here, then. >>> >>> I now understand what is going on - and there is certainly room for >>> improvements here, but more importantly the actual mmci busy detection >>> works as expected. >>> >>> When it comes to improvements, the main issue I have found is how we >>> treat DATA WRITES. In many cases we simply don't use the HW busy >>> detection at all, but instead rely on the mmc core to send CMD13 in a >>> loop to poll. Well, then if the polling would have consisted of a >>> couple of CMD13s that wouldn't be an issue, but my observations is >>> rather that the numbers of CMD13 sent to poll is in the range or >>> hundreds/thousands - per each WRITE request! >>> >>> I am going to send a patch (or two) that improves the behavior. It >>> might even involve changing parts in core layer, not sure how the end >>> result will look like yet. >>> >>> In any case, I have applied patch 1 and patch2 for next, as the tests >>> turned out well at my side. I also took the liberty of updating some >>> of the comments/changelogs, please have look and tell if there is >>> something you want to change. >>> >>> I will continue with the rest of series next week. >>> >>> Kind regards >>> Uffe >>> From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFEBEC04AAF for ; Tue, 21 May 2019 09:18:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B56122173E for ; Tue, 21 May 2019 09:18:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="aZ39l4Hs"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=st.com header.i=@st.com header.b="zu0FNCpQ" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org B56122173E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=st.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:From: References:To:Subject:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=Q9REveEhY46RevbHVT3r2+R8pyvQbuCivG3rWD+E2hQ=; b=aZ39l4HslxW1/Mel3csr8DHFX 1b+2Ia2P/2L0/jF5TUnSHNVLC4kTRhkBUUZ7Bv9D14oWLLLW1o7em6m0kABbDX3PnIIdzLjSBfJqb HlPPXd2rbIYVXgqHtkif0asLisBPAV7m/2Emg9x0TkL1FFJtjv7aqkeouHas9R5z0fEDGsbGjL2B8 z8RIBDqvgmWr1RBKpcmNLXPDS97a0xbwbCs80aO139MOui6i4NKQt0+FkICmqbiH3kY+jTtd4KdHW 76EdNMb9LJNPkAyvO+iVz+nVSlxa4CRAZmRdQA5KY943ZTdyOZuRTXLzLVlmGFvz7sh0AuFPdl/Hv c2wp1Wqdw==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hT0uF-0005rE-Tf; Tue, 21 May 2019 09:17:59 +0000 Received: from mx08-00178001.pphosted.com ([91.207.212.93] helo=mx07-00178001.pphosted.com) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hT0uC-0005qk-D4 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 21 May 2019 09:17:58 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (m0046661.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx08-00178001.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x4L96iJ0014021; Tue, 21 May 2019 11:17:51 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=st.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=STMicroelectronics; bh=4RTuKGHCLsvh6APcX9ZvfmHkgHj7OwihyknGBu1Dl3k=; b=zu0FNCpQ3k5YZ+Hsbbr3+WOhETEEI/gIOo8/DQQg6XhVOH+wQN5fmQxRdPoCRMQl5YHP BXFwqOgCQeT/O3uvkr/R1btmto74WK/L9rN8UnYKQwZC6LfYnCeswjgmf0wBmOOQ72ir HTGEDPHbl3+VDiPOrxUgouddIuxMgctnPwiTu5l9Ssm+sdJOvMDGmYaWJCNFq/8AP21Y NRJfA5saQo7a+yG5I5A4LjLOrqk74BBnHvNZfK2ealDkR4PahOAymzNzuVwKd1LkSaDJ T881Rf3ep8OKCnHgANMCr9YhMkR7PBygemChfoWMJoXEYrd+Rz/tnM6pM3JXW+ZSRigb VQ== Received: from beta.dmz-eu.st.com (beta.dmz-eu.st.com [164.129.1.35]) by mx08-00178001.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2sj8xg8bpr-1 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 21 May 2019 11:17:51 +0200 Received: from zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (zeta.dmz-eu.st.com [164.129.230.9]) by beta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 4ECC531; Tue, 21 May 2019 09:17:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from Webmail-eu.st.com (sfhdag6node1.st.com [10.75.127.16]) by zeta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id 1DB7C24EC; Tue, 21 May 2019 09:17:50 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [10.48.0.237] (10.75.127.44) by SFHDAG6NODE1.st.com (10.75.127.16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1347.2; Tue, 21 May 2019 11:17:49 +0200 Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 0/5] mmc: mmci: add busy detect for stm32 sdmmc variant To: Ulf Hansson References: <1556264798-18540-1-git-send-email-ludovic.Barre@st.com> <74b91eb4-e5a3-38b2-f732-29cdd058eb6a@st.com> From: Ludovic BARRE Message-ID: <7e15c8ec-f851-b0d3-a3ce-dfad2a398e78@st.com> Date: Tue, 21 May 2019 11:17:48 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US X-Originating-IP: [10.75.127.44] X-ClientProxiedBy: SFHDAG3NODE1.st.com (10.75.127.7) To SFHDAG6NODE1.st.com (10.75.127.16) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-05-21_01:, , signatures=0 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190521_021756_726514_69967C9E X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 20.84 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: DTML , Alexandre Torgue , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Rob Herring , Srinivas Kandagatla , Maxime Coquelin , linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com, Linux ARM Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 5/21/19 9:56 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On Tue, 21 May 2019 at 09:38, Ludovic BARRE wrote: >> >> hi Ulf >> >> Just a "gentleman ping" about the rest of series. >> "mmc: mmci: add busy detect for stm32 sdmmc variant" > > Thanks! > > It's been a busy period and I am currently traveling. My plan is to > look at in detail beginning of next week when get back home. I hope > that's okay. yes, I understand, it's just to not forget me :-) > > Kind regards > Uffe > >> >> Regards >> Ludo >> >> On 5/3/19 3:29 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>> On Tue, 30 Apr 2019 at 14:06, Ludovic BARRE wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 4/30/19 1:13 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 at 09:46, Ludovic Barre wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> From: Ludovic Barre >>>>>> >>>>>> This patch series adds busy detect for stm32 sdmmc variant. >>>>>> Some adaptations are required: >>>>>> -Avoid to check and poll busy status when is not expected. >>>>>> -Clear busy status bit if busy_detect_flag and busy_detect_mask are >>>>>> different. >>>>>> -Add hardware busy timeout with MMCIDATATIMER register. >>>>>> >>>>>> V2: >>>>>> -mmci_cmd_irq cleanup in separate patch. >>>>>> -simplify the busy_detect_flag exclude >>>>>> -replace sdmmc specific comment in >>>>>> "mmc: mmci: avoid fake busy polling in mmci_irq" >>>>>> to focus on common behavior >>>>>> >>>>>> Ludovic Barre (5): >>>>>> mmc: mmci: cleanup mmci_cmd_irq for busy detect feature >>>>>> mmc: mmci: avoid fake busy polling in mmci_irq >>>>>> mmc: mmci: fix clear of busy detect status >>>>>> mmc: mmci: add hardware busy timeout feature >>>>>> mmc: mmci: add busy detect for stm32 sdmmc variant >>>>>> >>>>>> drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------- >>>>>> drivers/mmc/host/mmci.h | 3 +++ >>>>>> 2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 2.7.4 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Ludovic, just wanted to let you know that I am reviewing and testing >>>>> this series. >>>>> >>>>> However, while running some tests on Ux500 for validating the busy >>>>> detection code, even without your series applied, I encounter some odd >>>>> behaviors. I am looking into the problem to understand better and will >>>>> let you know as soon as I have some more data to share. >>>> >>>> Oops, don't hesitate to share your status, if I could help. >>> >>> Thanks! Good and bad news here, then. >>> >>> I now understand what is going on - and there is certainly room for >>> improvements here, but more importantly the actual mmci busy detection >>> works as expected. >>> >>> When it comes to improvements, the main issue I have found is how we >>> treat DATA WRITES. In many cases we simply don't use the HW busy >>> detection at all, but instead rely on the mmc core to send CMD13 in a >>> loop to poll. Well, then if the polling would have consisted of a >>> couple of CMD13s that wouldn't be an issue, but my observations is >>> rather that the numbers of CMD13 sent to poll is in the range or >>> hundreds/thousands - per each WRITE request! >>> >>> I am going to send a patch (or two) that improves the behavior. It >>> might even involve changing parts in core layer, not sure how the end >>> result will look like yet. >>> >>> In any case, I have applied patch 1 and patch2 for next, as the tests >>> turned out well at my side. I also took the liberty of updating some >>> of the comments/changelogs, please have look and tell if there is >>> something you want to change. >>> >>> I will continue with the rest of series next week. >>> >>> Kind regards >>> Uffe >>> _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel