* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line @ 2015-10-16 11:46 Cliff Brust 2015-10-19 11:06 ` Hector Palacios 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Cliff Brust @ 2015-10-16 11:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot I have the need to erase our eMMC from U-Boot on our custom board due to a hard wired boot up configuration. Our design is based on the Freescale i.MX6Q SabreSD Board reference design. The bottom line is the U-Boot command "mmc erase" is failing with the error "Timeout waiting for DAT0 to go high!". Here's a list of the U-Boot commands issued and the result of each so you can see what is going on. ---------------------------------------- => mmc list FSL_SDHC: 0 FSL_SDHC: 1 (SD) FSL_SDHC: 2 (eMMC) => mmc dev 2 switch to partitions #0, OK mmc2(part 0) is current device => mmc info Device: FSL_SDHC Manufacturer ID: 45 OEM: 100 Name: SEM08 Tran Speed: 52000000 Rd Block Len: 512 MMC version 4.4.1 High Capacity: Yes Capacity: 7.4 GiB Bus Width: 8-bit Erase Group Size: 512 KiB HC WP Group Size: 16 MiB User Capacity: 7.4 GiB WRREL Boot Capacity: 2 MiB ENH RPMB Capacity: 128 KiB ENH => mmc erase 0 0x400 MMC erase: dev # 2, block # 0, count 1024 ... Timeout waiting for DAT0 to go high! mmc erase failed 0 blocks erased: ERROR ---------------------------------------- Any insight on this issue is greatly appreciated. Thanks, Cliff ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-10-16 11:46 [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line Cliff Brust @ 2015-10-19 11:06 ` Hector Palacios 2015-11-12 20:56 ` Fabio Estevam 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Hector Palacios @ 2015-10-19 11:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Dear Cliff, On 10/16/2015 01:46 PM, Cliff Brust wrote: > I have the need to erase our eMMC from U-Boot on our custom board due to a hard wired > boot up configuration. Our design is based on the Freescale i.MX6Q SabreSD Board > reference design. The bottom line is the U-Boot command "mmc erase" is failing with > the error "Timeout waiting for DAT0 to go high!". Here's a list of the U-Boot > commands issued and the result of each so you can see what is going on. > ---------------------------------------- > => mmc list > FSL_SDHC: 0 > FSL_SDHC: 1 (SD) > FSL_SDHC: 2 (eMMC) > > => mmc dev 2 > switch to partitions #0, OK > mmc2(part 0) is current device > > => mmc info > Device: FSL_SDHC > Manufacturer ID: 45 > OEM: 100 > Name: SEM08 > Tran Speed: 52000000 > Rd Block Len: 512 > MMC version 4.4.1 > High Capacity: Yes > Capacity: 7.4 GiB > Bus Width: 8-bit > Erase Group Size: 512 KiB > HC WP Group Size: 16 MiB > User Capacity: 7.4 GiB WRREL > Boot Capacity: 2 MiB ENH > RPMB Capacity: 128 KiB ENH > > => mmc erase 0 0x400 > MMC erase: dev # 2, block # 0, count 1024 ... > Timeout waiting for DAT0 to go high! > mmc erase failed > 0 blocks erased: ERROR > ---------------------------------------- > > Any insight on this issue is greatly appreciated. > Thanks, Cliff This issue is reproducible on Freescale's SABRESD on both SD card and eMMC with v2015.04. The issue has been there always, I believe. Apparently the command erases the first block, but the operation returns an error, so it aborts and it doesn't continue erasing futher blocks. I opened a similar thread a while ago: http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2015-June/215912.html Regards, -- Hector Palacios ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-10-19 11:06 ` Hector Palacios @ 2015-11-12 20:56 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-11-13 12:26 ` Palacios, Hector 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Fabio Estevam @ 2015-11-12 20:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Hector and Cliff, On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Hector Palacios <hector.palacios@digi.com> wrote: > This issue is reproducible on Freescale's SABRESD on both SD card and eMMC with > v2015.04. The issue has been there always, I believe. > Apparently the command erases the first block, but the operation returns an error, so > it aborts and it doesn't continue erasing futher blocks. > > I opened a similar thread a while ago: > http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2015-June/215912.html I am running mainline U-boot on a mx6qsabresd and it works fine here: => mmc dev 2 switch to partitions #0, OK mmc2(part 0) is current device => mmc erase 4000 1000 MMC erase: dev # 2, block # 16384, count 4096 ... 4096 blocks erased: OK => Regards, Fabio Estevam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-11-12 20:56 ` Fabio Estevam @ 2015-11-13 12:26 ` Palacios, Hector 2015-11-13 14:37 ` Fabio Estevam 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Palacios, Hector @ 2015-11-13 12:26 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Fabio, On Thu, 12 Nov 2015 21:56, Fabio Estevam wrote: > Hi Hector and Cliff, > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Hector Palacios > <hector.palacios@digi.com> wrote: > >> This issue is reproducible on Freescale's SABRESD on both SD card and eMMC with v2015.04. The >> issue has been there always, I believe. Apparently the command erases the first block, but the >> operation returns an error, so it aborts and it doesn't continue erasing futher blocks. >> >> I opened a similar thread a while ago: >> http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2015-June/215912.html > > > I am running mainline U-boot on a mx6qsabresd and it works fine here: > > => mmc dev 2 > switch to partitions #0, OK > mmc2(part 0) is current device > => mmc erase 4000 1000 > > MMC erase: dev # 2, block # 16384, count 4096 ... 4096 blocks erased: OK > => I can reproduce it with latest U-Boot on a mx6qsabresd both on the SD card and on the eMMC: U-Boot 2015.10-00638-g9ac4fc82071c (Nov 13 2015 - 12:44:11 +0100) CPU: Freescale i.MX6Q rev1.2 996 MHz (running at 792 MHz) CPU: Automotive temperature grade (-40C to 125C) at 45C Reset cause: POR Board: MX6-SabreSD I2C: ready DRAM: 1 GiB PMIC: PFUZE100 ID=0x10 MMC: FSL_SDHC: 0, FSL_SDHC: 1, FSL_SDHC: 2 *** Warning - bad CRC, using default environment PCI: pcie phy link never came up No panel detected: default to Hannstar-XGA Display: Hannstar-XGA (1024x768) In: serial Out: serial Err: serial Net: FEC [PRIME] Hit any key to stop autoboot: 0 SDCARD test: => mmc dev 1 switch to partitions #0, OK mmc1 is current device => mmc erase 4000 1000 MMC erase: dev # 1, block # 16384, count 4096 ... Timeout waiting for DAT0 to go high! mmc erase failed 0 blocks erased: ERROR eMMC test: => mmc dev 2 switch to partitions #0, OK mmc2(part 0) is current device => mmc erase 4000 1000 MMC erase: dev # 2, block # 16384, count 4096 ... Timeout waiting for DAT0 to go high! mmc erase failed 0 blocks erased: ERROR => Could it be a silicon revision issue? My CPU is i.MX6Q rev1.2. I tested on two SABRESD units with similar results. In the second board, erasing the SD card (mmc erase 4000 1000) occasionally works (it takes around 30 seconds). But the rest of times fails after a random number of blocks: => mmc erase 4000 1000 MMC erase: dev # 1, block # 16384, count 4096 ... Timeout waiting for DAT0 to go high! mmc erase failed 1412 blocks erased: ERROR The eMMC however *always* fails in both SABRESD boards (and in my custom board) after erasing sector #0. My eMMC is v4.5 and SABRESD is v4.4.1, but both of them fail: => mmcinfo (SABRE) Device: FSL_SDHC Manufacturer ID: 45 OEM: 100 Name: SEM08 Tran Speed: 52000000 Rd Block Len: 512 MMC version 4.4.1 High Capacity: Yes Capacity: 7.4 GiB Bus Width: 8-bit Erase Group Size: 512 KiB HC WP Group Size: 16 MiB User Capacity: 7.4 GiB WRREL Boot Capacity: 2 MiB ENH RPMB Capacity: 128 KiB ENH => mmcinfo (custom board) Device: FSL_SDHC Manufacturer ID: fe OEM: 14e Name: P1XXX Tran Speed: 52000000 Rd Block Len: 512 MMC version 4.5 High Capacity: Yes Capacity: 3.6 GiB Bus Width: 8-bit Erase Group Size: 512 KiB HC WP Group Size: 4 MiB User Capacity: 3.6 GiB Boot Capacity: 16 MiB ENH RPMB Capacity: 128 KiB ENH Regards, -- H?ctor Palacios ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-11-13 12:26 ` Palacios, Hector @ 2015-11-13 14:37 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-11-16 15:23 ` Fabio Estevam 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Fabio Estevam @ 2015-11-13 14:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Palacios, Hector <Hector.Palacios@digi.com> wrote: > Could it be a silicon revision issue? > My CPU is i.MX6Q rev1.2. I will try to test this on other sabresd boards next week. Regards, Fabio Estevam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-11-13 14:37 ` Fabio Estevam @ 2015-11-16 15:23 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-11-16 15:30 ` Fabio Estevam 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Fabio Estevam @ 2015-11-16 15:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Hector, On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Palacios, Hector > <Hector.Palacios@digi.com> wrote: > >> Could it be a silicon revision issue? >> My CPU is i.MX6Q rev1.2. > > I will try to test this on other sabresd boards next week. I tested this on other mx6qsabresd board I have and I could see the error. The board that failed is revC2 Regards, Fabio Estevam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-11-16 15:23 ` Fabio Estevam @ 2015-11-16 15:30 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-01 19:05 ` Eric Nelson 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Fabio Estevam @ 2015-11-16 15:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Hector, > > On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Palacios, Hector >> <Hector.Palacios@digi.com> wrote: >> >>> Could it be a silicon revision issue? >>> My CPU is i.MX6Q rev1.2. >> >> I will try to test this on other sabresd boards next week. > > I tested this on other mx6qsabresd board I have and I could see the error. > > The board that failed is revC2 Boards revC2 and revC4 failed. (Both are TO1.2) Board revB (with TO1.1) works fine. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-11-16 15:30 ` Fabio Estevam @ 2015-12-01 19:05 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-02 17:23 ` Fabio Estevam 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-01 19:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi all, On 11/16/2015 08:30 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote: > On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Hector, >> >> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On Fri, Nov 13, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Palacios, Hector >>> <Hector.Palacios@digi.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Could it be a silicon revision issue? >>>> My CPU is i.MX6Q rev1.2. >>> >>> I will try to test this on other sabresd boards next week. >> >> I tested this on other mx6qsabresd board I have and I could see the error. >> >> The board that failed is revC2 > > Boards revC2 and revC4 failed. (Both are TO1.2) > > Board revB (with TO1.1) works fine. > I've also recently seen this on two different custom boards. Both are running i.MX6Q TO1.2 and both are using eMMC from Micron. The code which is generating the error message: http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=blob;f=drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c;h=c5054d66bdcda029f0485958c87bd5154ccee591;hb=HEAD#l390 Seems to refer to an errata for the i.MX35 (ENGcm03648): http://cache.freescale.com/files/dsp/doc/errata/IMX35CE.pdf I don't see any reference to the errata in the i.MX6 docs. Ignoring the error (removing the return statement) seems to leave things in a workable state, so I suspect the problem isn't with an insufficient timeout. Regards, Eric ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-12-01 19:05 ` Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-02 17:23 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-02 18:47 ` Eric Nelson 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Fabio Estevam @ 2015-12-02 17:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Eric, On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com> wrote: > I've also recently seen this on two different custom boards. Both are > running i.MX6Q TO1.2 and both are using eMMC from Micron. One colleague of mine tested eMMC erasure on a mx6qsabresd revC5 board with a eMMC from Micron and it worked fine. So far I see: revB and revC5: works revC2 and revC4: don't work > > The code which is generating the error message: > > http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=blob;f=drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c;h=c5054d66bdcda029f0485958c87bd5154ccee591;hb=HEAD#l390 > > Seems to refer to an errata for the i.MX35 (ENGcm03648): > http://cache.freescale.com/files/dsp/doc/errata/IMX35CE.pdf > > I don't see any reference to the errata in the i.MX6 docs. This piece of code came from: 7a5b80297bc6cef ("mmc: fsl_esdhc: Poll until card is not busy anymore") Yes, ENGcm03648 is not listed in mx6 errata document. > Ignoring the error (removing the return statement) seems to leave things > in a workable state, so I suspect the problem isn't with an insufficient > timeout. May I see your change, please? Thanks, Fabio Estevam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-12-02 17:23 ` Fabio Estevam @ 2015-12-02 18:47 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-02 18:52 ` Fabio Estevam 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-02 18:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Fabio, On 12/02/2015 10:23 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote: > Hi Eric, > > On Tue, Dec 1, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com> wrote: > >> I've also recently seen this on two different custom boards. Both are >> running i.MX6Q TO1.2 and both are using eMMC from Micron. > > One colleague of mine tested eMMC erasure on a mx6qsabresd revC5 board > with a eMMC from Micron and it worked fine. > > So far I see: > > revB and revC5: works > revC2 and revC4: don't work > We're seeing this pretty intermittently and only with certain devices from the same batch, so I'm not sure I'd conclude that the problem won't happen on revB or revC5. >> >> The code which is generating the error message: >> >> http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=blob;f=drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c;h=c5054d66bdcda029f0485958c87bd5154ccee591;hb=HEAD#l390 >> >> Seems to refer to an errata for the i.MX35 (ENGcm03648): >> http://cache.freescale.com/files/dsp/doc/errata/IMX35CE.pdf >> >> I don't see any reference to the errata in the i.MX6 docs. > > This piece of code came from: > 7a5b80297bc6cef ("mmc: fsl_esdhc: Poll until card is not busy anymore") > > Yes, ENGcm03648 is not listed in mx6 errata document. > >> Ignoring the error (removing the return statement) seems to leave things >> in a workable state, so I suspect the problem isn't with an insufficient >> timeout. > > May I see your change, please? > Sure. It's a hack, but shows where we're hitting the problem (with the stop command). We haven't been using the "mmc erase" command, but see this when using ums to program eMMC. Regards, Eric -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: e647278657e32f74833eadc5f2cbe4d121c22842.patch Type: text/x-diff Size: 1305 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20151202/7da89e1d/attachment.patch> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-12-02 18:47 ` Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-02 18:52 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-02 19:28 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-02 19:37 ` Michael Trimarchi 0 siblings, 2 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Fabio Estevam @ 2015-12-02 18:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Eric, On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com> wrote: > Sure. It's a hack, but shows where we're hitting the problem > (with the stop command). > > We haven't been using the "mmc erase" command, but see this when > using ums to program eMMC. Ok, applied your patch, but still get: => mmc erase 4000 1000 MMC erase: dev # 2, block # 16384, count 4096 ... Timeout waiting for DAT0 to go high! mmc erase failed 0 blocks erased: ERROR => Thanks ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-12-02 18:52 ` Fabio Estevam @ 2015-12-02 19:28 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-02 19:53 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-02 19:37 ` Michael Trimarchi 1 sibling, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-02 19:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Fabio, On 12/02/2015 11:52 AM, Fabio Estevam wrote: > Hi Eric, > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com> wrote: >> Sure. It's a hack, but shows where we're hitting the problem >> (with the stop command). >> >> We haven't been using the "mmc erase" command, but see this when >> using ums to program eMMC. > > Ok, applied your patch, but still get: > > => mmc erase 4000 1000 > > MMC erase: dev # 2, block # 16384, count 4096 ... Timeout waiting for DAT0 to go > high! > mmc erase failed > 0 blocks erased: ERROR > => > You're hitting the block from a different path than we are and it will be tomorrow before I can get an offending board on my desk. What happens if you "#if 0" around this block? http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=blob;f=drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c;h=c5054d66bdcda029f0485958c87bd5154ccee591;hb=HEAD#l390 Do you know which command is failing? It should be one of these: MMC_CMD_ERASE_GROUP_START MMC_CMD_ERASE_GROUP_END MMC_CMD_ERASE http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=blob;f=drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c;h=7aea7e943b9e05c8aa537653f4ae8878ecb1b04b;hb=HEAD#l17 I think you can instrument and find out using this: diff --git a/drivers/mmc/mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/mmc.c index 53084a7..8f5d9e1 100644 --- a/drivers/mmc/mmc.c +++ b/drivers/mmc/mmc.c @@ -105,6 +105,9 @@ int mmc_send_cmd(struct mmc *mmc, struct mmc_cmd *cmd, struct mmc_data *data) #else ret = mmc->cfg->ops->send_cmd(mmc, cmd, data); #endif + if (ret) + printf("error %d from CMD_SEND:%d\n", ret, cmd->cmdidx); + return ret; } ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-12-02 19:28 ` Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-02 19:53 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-04 16:35 ` Eric Nelson 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Fabio Estevam @ 2015-12-02 19:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Eric, On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com> wrote: > You're hitting the block from a different path than we are and it will > be tomorrow before I can get an offending board on my desk. > > What happens if you "#if 0" around this block? Then the error changes to: => mmc erase 4000 1000 MMC erase: dev # 2, block # 16384, count 4096 ... Timeout waiting card ready 0 blocks erased: ERROR > > http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=blob;f=drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c;h=c5054d66bdcda029f0485958c87bd5154ccee591;hb=HEAD#l390 > > Do you know which command is failing? It should be one of these: > MMC_CMD_ERASE_GROUP_START > MMC_CMD_ERASE_GROUP_END > MMC_CMD_ERASE It is MMC_CMD_ERASE as shown below. > > http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=blob;f=drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c;h=7aea7e943b9e05c8aa537653f4ae8878ecb1b04b;hb=HEAD#l17 > > I think you can instrument and find out using this: > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/mmc.c > index 53084a7..8f5d9e1 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/mmc.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/mmc.c > @@ -105,6 +105,9 @@ int mmc_send_cmd(struct mmc *mmc, struct mmc_cmd > *cmd, struct mmc_data *data) > #else > ret = mmc->cfg->ops->send_cmd(mmc, cmd, data); > #endif > + if (ret) > + printf("error %d from CMD_SEND:%d\n", ret, cmd->cmdidx); > + > return ret; Applying this change on top of head I get: => mmc erase 4000 1000 MMC erase: dev # 2, block # 16384, count 4096 ... Timeout waiting for DAT0 to go high! error -19 from CMD_SEND:38 mmc erase failed 0 blocks erased: ERROR => Thanks ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-12-02 19:53 ` Fabio Estevam @ 2015-12-04 16:35 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-04 16:37 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-04 22:42 ` Eric Nelson 0 siblings, 2 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-04 16:35 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Fabio, On 12/02/2015 12:53 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote: > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com> wrote: > ... >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/mmc.c >> index 53084a7..8f5d9e1 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mmc/mmc.c >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/mmc.c >> @@ -105,6 +105,9 @@ int mmc_send_cmd(struct mmc *mmc, struct mmc_cmd >> *cmd, struct mmc_data *data) >> #else >> ret = mmc->cfg->ops->send_cmd(mmc, cmd, data); >> #endif >> + if (ret) >> + printf("error %d from CMD_SEND:%d\n", ret, cmd->cmdidx); >> + >> return ret; > > Applying this change on top of head I get: > > => mmc erase 4000 1000 > > MMC erase: dev # 2, block # 16384, count 4096 ... Timeout waiting for DAT0 to go > high! > error -19 from CMD_SEND:38 > mmc erase failed > 0 blocks erased: ERROR How easy is this for you to reproduce? I'm only seeing the error sporadically, which makes it difficult to test. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-12-04 16:35 ` Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-04 16:37 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-04 22:42 ` Eric Nelson 1 sibling, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Fabio Estevam @ 2015-12-04 16:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Eric, On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com> wrote: > How easy is this for you to reproduce? Very easy as it happens 100% of the times I run 'mmc erase' on a revC2 or revC4 board. Thanks ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-12-04 16:35 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-04 16:37 ` Fabio Estevam @ 2015-12-04 22:42 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-05 0:19 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-07 0:21 ` Fabio Estevam 1 sibling, 2 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-04 22:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi all, On 12/04/2015 09:35 AM, Eric Nelson wrote: > Hi Fabio, > > On 12/02/2015 12:53 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com> wrote: >> > ... >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/mmc.c >>> index 53084a7..8f5d9e1 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/mmc/mmc.c >>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/mmc.c >>> @@ -105,6 +105,9 @@ int mmc_send_cmd(struct mmc *mmc, struct mmc_cmd >>> *cmd, struct mmc_data *data) >>> #else >>> ret = mmc->cfg->ops->send_cmd(mmc, cmd, data); >>> #endif >>> + if (ret) >>> + printf("error %d from CMD_SEND:%d\n", ret, cmd->cmdidx); >>> + >>> return ret; >> >> Applying this change on top of head I get: >> >> => mmc erase 4000 1000 >> >> MMC erase: dev # 2, block # 16384, count 4096 ... Timeout waiting for DAT0 to go >> high! >> error -19 from CMD_SEND:38 >> mmc erase failed >> 0 blocks erased: ERROR > > How easy is this for you to reproduce? > > I'm only seeing the error sporadically, which makes it difficult to > test. > I've figured out a way to repeat this on my machine. If I write 0xff's to the eMMC blocks, then issue an erase for the same, I get the problem with each MMC_ERASE command. I've also found something that fixes the issue in my testing. Changing SECURE_ERASE to 0 from 0x80000000 in include/mmc.h allows things to function for me. Page 115 of the JEDEC eMMC 4.5 spec says that bit 31 is obsolete and should be zero: http://www.jedec.org/sites/default/files/docs/jesd84-B45.pdf Hector and Fabio, can you test that change? Please advise, Eric diff --git a/include/mmc.h b/include/mmc.h index cda9a19..b1528d4 100644 --- a/include/mmc.h +++ b/include/mmc.h @@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ #define OCR_VOLTAGE_MASK 0x007FFF80 #define OCR_ACCESS_MODE 0x60000000 -#define SECURE_ERASE 0x80000000 +#define SECURE_ERASE 0x00000000 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-12-04 22:42 ` Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-05 0:19 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-07 0:21 ` Fabio Estevam 1 sibling, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Fabio Estevam @ 2015-12-05 0:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Eric, On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com> wrote: > I've figured out a way to repeat this on my machine. > > If I write 0xff's to the eMMC blocks, then issue an erase for the same, > I get the problem with each MMC_ERASE command. > > I've also found something that fixes the issue in my testing. > > Changing SECURE_ERASE to 0 from 0x80000000 in include/mmc.h allows > things to function for me. > > Page 115 of the JEDEC eMMC 4.5 spec says that bit 31 is obsolete and > should be zero: > http://www.jedec.org/sites/default/files/docs/jesd84-B45.pdf > > Hector and Fabio, can you test that change? > > Please advise, That sounds promising. I will test it on Monday when I get access to a revC4 board. Thanks a lot! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-12-04 22:42 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-05 0:19 ` Fabio Estevam @ 2015-12-07 0:21 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-07 14:36 ` Eric Nelson 1 sibling, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Fabio Estevam @ 2015-12-07 0:21 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Eric, On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com> wrote: > I've figured out a way to repeat this on my machine. > > If I write 0xff's to the eMMC blocks, then issue an erase for the same, > I get the problem with each MMC_ERASE command. > > I've also found something that fixes the issue in my testing. > > Changing SECURE_ERASE to 0 from 0x80000000 in include/mmc.h allows > things to function for me. > > Page 115 of the JEDEC eMMC 4.5 spec says that bit 31 is obsolete and > should be zero: > http://www.jedec.org/sites/default/files/docs/jesd84-B45.pdf > > Hector and Fabio, can you test that change? Managed to get access to a revC2 board and tested your change. I am happy to say that 'mmc erase' works now :-) Good job, Eric! When you send a formal patch then you can add: Tested-by: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@freescale.com> Thanks! ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-12-07 0:21 ` Fabio Estevam @ 2015-12-07 14:36 ` Eric Nelson 0 siblings, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-07 14:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Fabio, On 12/06/2015 05:21 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote: > Hi Eric, > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 8:42 PM, Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com> wrote: > >> I've figured out a way to repeat this on my machine. >> >> If I write 0xff's to the eMMC blocks, then issue an erase for the same, >> I get the problem with each MMC_ERASE command. >> >> I've also found something that fixes the issue in my testing. >> >> Changing SECURE_ERASE to 0 from 0x80000000 in include/mmc.h allows >> things to function for me. >> >> Page 115 of the JEDEC eMMC 4.5 spec says that bit 31 is obsolete and >> should be zero: >> http://www.jedec.org/sites/default/files/docs/jesd84-B45.pdf >> >> Hector and Fabio, can you test that change? > > Managed to get access to a revC2 board and tested your change. > > I am happy to say that 'mmc erase' works now :-) > Glad to hear it. > Good job, Eric! > > When you send a formal patch then you can add: > > Tested-by: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@freescale.com> > Will do. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-12-02 18:52 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-02 19:28 ` Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-02 19:37 ` Michael Trimarchi 2015-12-02 19:54 ` Fabio Estevam 1 sibling, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Michael Trimarchi @ 2015-12-02 19:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 7:52 PM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Eric, > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 4:47 PM, Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com> wrote: >> Sure. It's a hack, but shows where we're hitting the problem >> (with the stop command). >> >> We haven't been using the "mmc erase" command, but see this when >> using ums to program eMMC. > > Ok, applied your patch, but still get: > > => mmc erase 4000 1000 > > MMC erase: dev # 2, block # 16384, count 4096 ... Timeout waiting for DAT0 to go > high! > mmc erase failed > 0 blocks erased: ERROR > => > Can you print the sysctl & 0xF? I want to check if this workaround is really applied Michael > Thanks > _______________________________________________ > U-Boot mailing list > U-Boot at lists.denx.de > http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot -- | Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi Amarula Solutions BV | | COO - Founder Cruquiuskade 47 | | +31(0)851119172 Amsterdam 1018 AM NL | | [`as] http://www.amarulasolutions.com | ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-12-02 19:37 ` Michael Trimarchi @ 2015-12-02 19:54 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-02 20:00 ` Michael Trimarchi 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Fabio Estevam @ 2015-12-02 19:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Michael, On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Michael Trimarchi <michael@amarulasolutions.com> wrote: > Can you print the sysctl & 0xF? I want to check if this workaround is > really applied In my testing I see the error with or without the ENGcm03648 workaround. Regards, Fabio Estevam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-12-02 19:54 ` Fabio Estevam @ 2015-12-02 20:00 ` Michael Trimarchi 2015-12-04 16:08 ` Eric Nelson 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Michael Trimarchi @ 2015-12-02 20:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:54 PM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Michael, > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Michael Trimarchi > <michael@amarulasolutions.com> wrote: > >> Can you print the sysctl & 0xF? I want to check if this workaround is >> really applied > > In my testing I see the error with or without the ENGcm03648 workaround. > Well the workaround works if the sysctl is 0xf on the last bits, because it needs the clocks enable according to the original description. http://git.freescale.com/git/cgit.cgi/imx/uboot-imx.git/commit/drivers/mmc/imx_esdhc.c?h=imx_v2009.08_12.01.01&id=e436525a70fe47623d346bc7d9f08f12ff8ad787 So if you hit this timeout without having this set, I don't think it can work Michael > Regards, > > Fabio Estevam -- | Michael Nazzareno Trimarchi Amarula Solutions BV | | COO - Founder Cruquiuskade 47 | | +31(0)851119172 Amsterdam 1018 AM NL | | [`as] http://www.amarulasolutions.com | ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-12-02 20:00 ` Michael Trimarchi @ 2015-12-04 16:08 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-04 16:50 ` Eric Nelson 0 siblings, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-04 16:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Michael, On 12/02/2015 01:00 PM, Michael Trimarchi wrote: > Hi > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 8:54 PM, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi Michael, >> >> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Michael Trimarchi >> <michael@amarulasolutions.com> wrote: >> >>> Can you print the sysctl & 0xF? I want to check if this workaround is >>> really applied >> >> In my testing I see the error with or without the ENGcm03648 workaround. >> > > Well the workaround works if the sysctl is 0xf on the last bits, > because it needs the > clocks enable according to the original description. > > http://git.freescale.com/git/cgit.cgi/imx/uboot-imx.git/commit/drivers/mmc/imx_esdhc.c?h=imx_v2009.08_12.01.01&id=e436525a70fe47623d346bc7d9f08f12ff8ad787 > > So if you hit this timeout without having this set, I don't think it can work > I think you're onto something. According to the i.MX35 reference manual, which I think was the origin of this patch, the low four bits of the SYSCTL register of the SDHC5 3 - SDCLKEN 2 - PEREN 1 - HCKEN 0 - IPGEN See page 603 of http://cache.freescale.com/files/dsp/doc/ref_manual/IMX35RM.pdf But in the i.MX6 reference manual, the low four bits are reserved and say "Always write as 1". See pages 5679-5680 of http://cache.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/ref_manual/IMX6DQRM.pdf It appears that when this patch was ported from the Freescale version, the test for "is_usdhc" was lost. http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=commitdiff;h=7a5b80297bc6cef0c10e5f57ac0450678dc7bc5e ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-12-04 16:08 ` Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-04 16:50 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-04 17:06 ` Michael Trimarchi 2015-12-07 14:50 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH] mmc: update MMC_ERASE argument to match Linux kernel Eric Nelson 0 siblings, 2 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-04 16:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi all, On 12/04/2015 09:08 AM, Eric Nelson wrote: ... > > I think you're onto something. > > According to the i.MX35 reference manual, which I think was the origin > of this patch, the low four bits of the SYSCTL register of the SDHC5 > 3 - SDCLKEN > 2 - PEREN > 1 - HCKEN > 0 - IPGEN > > See page 603 of > http://cache.freescale.com/files/dsp/doc/ref_manual/IMX35RM.pdf > > But in the i.MX6 reference manual, the low four bits are reserved and > say "Always write as 1". > > See pages 5679-5680 of > http://cache.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/ref_manual/IMX6DQRM.pdf > > It appears that when this patch was ported from the Freescale version, > the test for "is_usdhc" was lost. > > http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=commitdiff;h=7a5b80297bc6cef0c10e5f57ac0450678dc7bc5e > > Following up, this code is bugged on i.MX6: http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=blob;f=drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c;h=c5054d66bdcda029f0485958c87bd5154ccee591;hb=HEAD#l505 As are a couple of other things in the driver, as seen by trying to compile without the constants for the low 4 bits: diff --git a/include/fsl_esdhc.h b/include/fsl_esdhc.h index aa1b4cf..a4b87ce 100644 --- a/include/fsl_esdhc.h +++ b/include/fsl_esdhc.h @@ -25,10 +25,12 @@ #define SYSCTL_INITA 0x08000000 #define SYSCTL_TIMEOUT_MASK 0x000f0000 #define SYSCTL_CLOCK_MASK 0x0000fff0 +#if !defined(CONFIG_MX6) #define SYSCTL_CKEN 0x00000008 #define SYSCTL_PEREN 0x00000004 #define SYSCTL_HCKEN 0x00000002 #define SYSCTL_IPGEN 0x00000001 +#endif #define SYSCTL_RSTA 0x01000000 #define SYSCTL_RSTC 0x02000000 #define SYSCTL_RSTD 0x04000000 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line 2015-12-04 16:50 ` Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-04 17:06 ` Michael Trimarchi 2015-12-07 14:50 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH] mmc: update MMC_ERASE argument to match Linux kernel Eric Nelson 1 sibling, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Michael Trimarchi @ 2015-12-04 17:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi On Dec 4, 2015 5:50 PM, "Eric Nelson" <eric@nelint.com> wrote: > > Hi all, > > On 12/04/2015 09:08 AM, Eric Nelson wrote: > ... > > > > I think you're onto something. > > > > According to the i.MX35 reference manual, which I think was the origin > > of this patch, the low four bits of the SYSCTL register of the SDHC5 > > 3 - SDCLKEN > > 2 - PEREN > > 1 - HCKEN > > 0 - IPGEN > > > > See page 603 of > > http://cache.freescale.com/files/dsp/doc/ref_manual/IMX35RM.pdf > > > > But in the i.MX6 reference manual, the low four bits are reserved and > > say "Always write as 1". > > > > See pages 5679-5680 of > > http://cache.freescale.com/files/32bit/doc/ref_manual/IMX6DQRM.pdf > > > > It appears that when this patch was ported from the Freescale version, > > the test for "is_usdhc" was lost. > > > > http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=commitdiff;h=7a5b80297bc6cef0c10e5f57ac0450678dc7bc5e > > > > > Happy if you fix down your problem Michael > Following up, this code is bugged on i.MX6: > > http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=blob;f=drivers/mmc/fsl_esdhc.c;h=c5054d66bdcda029f0485958c87bd5154ccee591;hb=HEAD#l505 > > As are a couple of other things in the driver, as seen by > trying to compile without the constants for the low 4 bits: > > diff --git a/include/fsl_esdhc.h b/include/fsl_esdhc.h > index aa1b4cf..a4b87ce 100644 > --- a/include/fsl_esdhc.h > +++ b/include/fsl_esdhc.h > @@ -25,10 +25,12 @@ > #define SYSCTL_INITA 0x08000000 > #define SYSCTL_TIMEOUT_MASK 0x000f0000 > #define SYSCTL_CLOCK_MASK 0x0000fff0 > +#if !defined(CONFIG_MX6) > #define SYSCTL_CKEN 0x00000008 > #define SYSCTL_PEREN 0x00000004 > #define SYSCTL_HCKEN 0x00000002 > #define SYSCTL_IPGEN 0x00000001 > +#endif > #define SYSCTL_RSTA 0x01000000 > #define SYSCTL_RSTC 0x02000000 > #define SYSCTL_RSTD 0x04000000 > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH] mmc: update MMC_ERASE argument to match Linux kernel. 2015-12-04 16:50 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-04 17:06 ` Michael Trimarchi @ 2015-12-07 14:50 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-09 10:55 ` Hector Palacios 2016-01-04 22:23 ` [U-Boot] " Tom Rini 1 sibling, 2 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-07 14:50 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Table 41 of the JEDEC standard for eMMC says that bit 31 of the command argument is obsolete when issuing the ERASE command (CMD38) on page 115 of this document: http://www.jedec.org/sites/default/files/docs/jesd84-B45.pdf The SD Card Association Physical Layer Simplified Specification also makes no mention of the use of bit 31. https://www.sdcard.org/downloads/pls/part1_410.pdf The Linux kernel distinguishes between secure (bit 31 set) and non-secure erase, and this patch copies the macro names from include/linux/mmc/core.h. Tested-by: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@freescale.com> Signed-off-by: Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com> --- drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c | 2 +- include/mmc.h | 7 ++++++- 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c b/drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c index 7aea7e9..221bf30 100644 --- a/drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c +++ b/drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ static ulong mmc_erase_t(struct mmc *mmc, ulong start, lbaint_t blkcnt) goto err_out; cmd.cmdidx = MMC_CMD_ERASE; - cmd.cmdarg = SECURE_ERASE; + cmd.cmdarg = MMC_ERASE_ARG; cmd.resp_type = MMC_RSP_R1b; err = mmc_send_cmd(mmc, &cmd, NULL); diff --git a/include/mmc.h b/include/mmc.h index cda9a19..b89962a 100644 --- a/include/mmc.h +++ b/include/mmc.h @@ -121,7 +121,12 @@ #define OCR_VOLTAGE_MASK 0x007FFF80 #define OCR_ACCESS_MODE 0x60000000 -#define SECURE_ERASE 0x80000000 +#define MMC_ERASE_ARG 0x00000000 +#define MMC_SECURE_ERASE_ARG 0x80000000 +#define MMC_TRIM_ARG 0x00000001 +#define MMC_DISCARD_ARG 0x00000003 +#define MMC_SECURE_TRIM1_ARG 0x80000001 +#define MMC_SECURE_TRIM2_ARG 0x80008000 #define MMC_STATUS_MASK (~0x0206BF7F) #define MMC_STATUS_SWITCH_ERROR (1 << 7) -- 2.6.2 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH] mmc: update MMC_ERASE argument to match Linux kernel. 2015-12-07 14:50 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH] mmc: update MMC_ERASE argument to match Linux kernel Eric Nelson @ 2015-12-09 10:55 ` Hector Palacios 2015-12-22 9:55 ` Fabio Estevam 2016-01-04 22:23 ` [U-Boot] " Tom Rini 1 sibling, 1 reply; 29+ messages in thread From: Hector Palacios @ 2015-12-09 10:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Eric and Fabio, On 12/07/2015 03:50 PM, Eric Nelson wrote: > Table 41 of the JEDEC standard for eMMC says that bit 31 of > the command argument is obsolete when issuing the ERASE > command (CMD38) on page 115 of this document: > http://www.jedec.org/sites/default/files/docs/jesd84-B45.pdf > > The SD Card Association Physical Layer Simplified Specification also > makes no mention of the use of bit 31. > https://www.sdcard.org/downloads/pls/part1_410.pdf > > The Linux kernel distinguishes between secure (bit 31 set) and > non-secure erase, and this patch copies the macro names from > include/linux/mmc/core.h. > > Tested-by: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@freescale.com> > Signed-off-by: Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com> > --- > drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c | 2 +- > include/mmc.h | 7 ++++++- > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c b/drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c > index 7aea7e9..221bf30 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c > @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ static ulong mmc_erase_t(struct mmc *mmc, ulong start, lbaint_t blkcnt) > goto err_out; > > cmd.cmdidx = MMC_CMD_ERASE; > - cmd.cmdarg = SECURE_ERASE; > + cmd.cmdarg = MMC_ERASE_ARG; > cmd.resp_type = MMC_RSP_R1b; > > err = mmc_send_cmd(mmc, &cmd, NULL); > diff --git a/include/mmc.h b/include/mmc.h > index cda9a19..b89962a 100644 > --- a/include/mmc.h > +++ b/include/mmc.h > @@ -121,7 +121,12 @@ > #define OCR_VOLTAGE_MASK 0x007FFF80 > #define OCR_ACCESS_MODE 0x60000000 > > -#define SECURE_ERASE 0x80000000 > +#define MMC_ERASE_ARG 0x00000000 > +#define MMC_SECURE_ERASE_ARG 0x80000000 > +#define MMC_TRIM_ARG 0x00000001 > +#define MMC_DISCARD_ARG 0x00000003 > +#define MMC_SECURE_TRIM1_ARG 0x80000001 > +#define MMC_SECURE_TRIM2_ARG 0x80008000 > > #define MMC_STATUS_MASK (~0x0206BF7F) > #define MMC_STATUS_SWITCH_ERROR (1 << 7) > This fixes the issue on eMMC. Very good job! Thank you. Tested-by: Hector Palacios <hector.palacios@digi.com> On the uSD card, it occasionally works (when it didn't before), but it still fails many times, after erasing a random number of blocks (at random times). I guess this must be a different issue, though. I could reproduce it on my board (4 data lines) and on the SabreSD (8 data lines) with v2015.04. Here is an output from the SabreSD: => time mmc erase 200000 100 MMC erase: dev # 1, block # 2097152, count 256 ... 256 blocks erased: OK time: 1.866 seconds => time mmc erase 200000 1000 MMC erase: dev # 1, block # 2097152, count 4096 ... Timeout waiting for DAT0 to go high! mmc erase failed 1409 blocks erased: ERROR time: 11.263 seconds => time mmc erase 200000 10000 MMC erase: dev # 1, block # 2097152, count 65536 ... Timeout waiting for DAT0 to go high! mmc erase failed 8192 blocks erased: ERROR time: 59.139 seconds Thank you -- Hector Palacios ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] [PATCH] mmc: update MMC_ERASE argument to match Linux kernel. 2015-12-09 10:55 ` Hector Palacios @ 2015-12-22 9:55 ` Fabio Estevam 0 siblings, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Fabio Estevam @ 2015-12-22 9:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot Hi Tom and Pantelis, On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 8:55 AM, Hector Palacios <hector.palacios@digi.com> wrote: > Hi Eric and Fabio, > > On 12/07/2015 03:50 PM, Eric Nelson wrote: >> Table 41 of the JEDEC standard for eMMC says that bit 31 of >> the command argument is obsolete when issuing the ERASE >> command (CMD38) on page 115 of this document: >> http://www.jedec.org/sites/default/files/docs/jesd84-B45.pdf >> >> The SD Card Association Physical Layer Simplified Specification also >> makes no mention of the use of bit 31. >> https://www.sdcard.org/downloads/pls/part1_410.pdf >> >> The Linux kernel distinguishes between secure (bit 31 set) and >> non-secure erase, and this patch copies the macro names from >> include/linux/mmc/core.h. >> >> Tested-by: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@freescale.com> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com> >> --- >> drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c | 2 +- >> include/mmc.h | 7 ++++++- >> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c b/drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c >> index 7aea7e9..221bf30 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/mmc_write.c >> @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ static ulong mmc_erase_t(struct mmc *mmc, ulong start, lbaint_t blkcnt) >> goto err_out; >> >> cmd.cmdidx = MMC_CMD_ERASE; >> - cmd.cmdarg = SECURE_ERASE; >> + cmd.cmdarg = MMC_ERASE_ARG; >> cmd.resp_type = MMC_RSP_R1b; >> >> err = mmc_send_cmd(mmc, &cmd, NULL); >> diff --git a/include/mmc.h b/include/mmc.h >> index cda9a19..b89962a 100644 >> --- a/include/mmc.h >> +++ b/include/mmc.h >> @@ -121,7 +121,12 @@ >> #define OCR_VOLTAGE_MASK 0x007FFF80 >> #define OCR_ACCESS_MODE 0x60000000 >> >> -#define SECURE_ERASE 0x80000000 >> +#define MMC_ERASE_ARG 0x00000000 >> +#define MMC_SECURE_ERASE_ARG 0x80000000 >> +#define MMC_TRIM_ARG 0x00000001 >> +#define MMC_DISCARD_ARG 0x00000003 >> +#define MMC_SECURE_TRIM1_ARG 0x80000001 >> +#define MMC_SECURE_TRIM2_ARG 0x80008000 >> >> #define MMC_STATUS_MASK (~0x0206BF7F) >> #define MMC_STATUS_SWITCH_ERROR (1 << 7) >> > > This fixes the issue on eMMC. Very good job! Thank you. > > Tested-by: Hector Palacios <hector.palacios@digi.com> Could this one be applied to 2016.01? Thanks ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
* [U-Boot] mmc: update MMC_ERASE argument to match Linux kernel. 2015-12-07 14:50 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH] mmc: update MMC_ERASE argument to match Linux kernel Eric Nelson 2015-12-09 10:55 ` Hector Palacios @ 2016-01-04 22:23 ` Tom Rini 1 sibling, 0 replies; 29+ messages in thread From: Tom Rini @ 2016-01-04 22:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: u-boot On Mon, Dec 07, 2015 at 07:50:01AM -0700, Eric Nelson wrote: > Table 41 of the JEDEC standard for eMMC says that bit 31 of > the command argument is obsolete when issuing the ERASE > command (CMD38) on page 115 of this document: > http://www.jedec.org/sites/default/files/docs/jesd84-B45.pdf > > The SD Card Association Physical Layer Simplified Specification also > makes no mention of the use of bit 31. > https://www.sdcard.org/downloads/pls/part1_410.pdf > > The Linux kernel distinguishes between secure (bit 31 set) and > non-secure erase, and this patch copies the macro names from > include/linux/mmc/core.h. > > Tested-by: Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@freescale.com> > Signed-off-by: Eric Nelson <eric@nelint.com> > Tested-by: Hector Palacios <hector.palacios@digi.com> Applied to u-boot/master, thanks! -- Tom -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20160104/bf7e0dbe/attachment.sig> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 29+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-01-04 22:23 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 29+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2015-10-16 11:46 [U-Boot] mmc erase fails from U-Boot command line Cliff Brust 2015-10-19 11:06 ` Hector Palacios 2015-11-12 20:56 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-11-13 12:26 ` Palacios, Hector 2015-11-13 14:37 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-11-16 15:23 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-11-16 15:30 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-01 19:05 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-02 17:23 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-02 18:47 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-02 18:52 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-02 19:28 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-02 19:53 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-04 16:35 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-04 16:37 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-04 22:42 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-05 0:19 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-07 0:21 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-07 14:36 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-02 19:37 ` Michael Trimarchi 2015-12-02 19:54 ` Fabio Estevam 2015-12-02 20:00 ` Michael Trimarchi 2015-12-04 16:08 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-04 16:50 ` Eric Nelson 2015-12-04 17:06 ` Michael Trimarchi 2015-12-07 14:50 ` [U-Boot] [PATCH] mmc: update MMC_ERASE argument to match Linux kernel Eric Nelson 2015-12-09 10:55 ` Hector Palacios 2015-12-22 9:55 ` Fabio Estevam 2016-01-04 22:23 ` [U-Boot] " Tom Rini
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.