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=-7.4 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no 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 32B41C433DB for ; Thu, 4 Feb 2021 12:56:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E725764E50 for ; Thu, 4 Feb 2021 12:56:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236186AbhBDM4B (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Feb 2021 07:56:01 -0500 Received: from mx08-00178001.pphosted.com ([91.207.212.93]:44710 "EHLO mx07-00178001.pphosted.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S236106AbhBDMz6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Feb 2021 07:55:58 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (m0046661.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx07-00178001.pphosted.com (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 114CrClx029752; Thu, 4 Feb 2021 13:55:02 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=foss.st.com; h=subject : to : cc : references : from : message-id : date : mime-version : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=selector1; bh=dDxbuN1M2YXULMXlXW3oAl3FlBg++dDkJnKD4C31Zkk=; b=byzEcUJ8cHDnwCvwdROgOgEWLDexyLMhykJ8PLOtkSd25hUH8MJpSUbFHZ7qrO6GBfcr sPEE3FsHcjU70c3ifedtjDkniFxMPhmeqQ5h1LYhR/CgiKe26RhnN6rkvIogSN4N/0Sn QqGfFK/zhUzkWTuQiNjglg2XgPSRnCZD9QvkE4vESn1YJyJKQji3ssFyStU5odcJVn+f JWh8Le4+JWOWcq0uGx2We60/sgdPLnjXp3wtmDRpx5CB3WAaMzB2Ww/HXSElnlQu4poH ijDuI08QIUSJQF3spool8wmTEOgHX+G830cxkg9UVMn+iJKFOjys/+qvl2FBpMjiDR3w Jg== Received: from beta.dmz-eu.st.com (beta.dmz-eu.st.com [164.129.1.35]) by mx07-00178001.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 36e7x17xfe-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 04 Feb 2021 13:55:02 +0100 Received: from euls16034.sgp.st.com (euls16034.sgp.st.com [10.75.44.20]) by beta.dmz-eu.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id D48CE10002A; Thu, 4 Feb 2021 13:54:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from Webmail-eu.st.com (sfhdag2node3.st.com [10.75.127.6]) by euls16034.sgp.st.com (STMicroelectronics) with ESMTP id B6D3324C9AE; Thu, 4 Feb 2021 13:54:58 +0100 (CET) Received: from lmecxl0504.lme.st.com (10.75.127.51) by SFHDAG2NODE3.st.com (10.75.127.6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Thu, 4 Feb 2021 13:54:58 +0100 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mmc: mmci: enable MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY To: Marek Vasut , CC: , , , , , , , , , , , References: <20210204120547.15381-1-yann.gautier@foss.st.com> <20210204120547.15381-2-yann.gautier@foss.st.com> <0ac77e8d-9400-abc8-f963-943e9cba94db@denx.de> From: Yann GAUTIER Message-ID: <9fbd2fca-e4f5-d28f-74de-d9906cc232bf@foss.st.com> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 2021 13:54:57 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <0ac77e8d-9400-abc8-f963-943e9cba94db@denx.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.75.127.51] X-ClientProxiedBy: SFHDAG2NODE3.st.com (10.75.127.6) To SFHDAG2NODE3.st.com (10.75.127.6) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.369,18.0.737 definitions=2021-02-04_07:2021-02-04,2021-02-04 signatures=0 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2/4/21 1:26 PM, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 2/4/21 1:05 PM, yann.gautier@foss.st.com wrote: >> From: Yann Gautier >> >> To properly manage commands awaiting R1B responses, the capability >> MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY is enabled in mmci driver, for variants that >> manage busy detection. >> This R1B management needs both the flags MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY and >> MMC_CAP_WAIT_WHILE_BUSY to be enabled together. >> > Shouldn't this have Fixes: tag ? Hi Marek, There is no unique patch that brought the issue, but a combination of several things: - The series that brought the MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY flag [1] - The series that enabled MMC_ERASE for all hosts [2] (removal of MMC_CAP_ERASE) But you're right, this patch may go on v5.8.x kernel and newer versions. Regards, Yann [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-mmc/cover/20200310153340.5593-1-ulf.hansson@linaro.org/ [2] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-mmc/patch/20200508112853.23525-1-ulf.hansson@linaro.org/