From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
To: Bean Huo <huobean@gmail.com>
Cc: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Avri Altman <avri.altman@wdc.com>,
linux-mmc <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Bean Huo (beanhuo)" <beanhuo@micron.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] mmc: core: No need to calculate the timeout value for CQE data transmission
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2021 14:48:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPDyKFpAjMwPbxew0FyHH9mLOTaPw01AL0fCCLDjSP0N=xQcaA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <92123c0398e154334cc947ce8f16e89ce0c3c9af.camel@gmail.com>
On Wed, 15 Sept 2021 at 11:54, Bean Huo <huobean@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2021-09-14 at 10:13 +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > > }
> > > + /*
> > > + * In case CQE is enabled, the timeout will be set a
> > > maximum timeout in
> > > + * sdhci_cqe_enable(), so, no need to go through the below
> > > algorithm.
> > > + */
> > > + if (host->cqe_enabled)
> >
> >
> > I don't think this is a good idea. For example, host->cqe_enabled is
> >
> > set for the hsq case well.
>
> Uffe,
>
> My apologies for this, I forgot to check hsq, hsq will call
> sdhci_send_command() as well.
>
>
> How about changing it to this?
>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
> index 240c5af793dc..7235e398ef93 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
> @@ -649,6 +649,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(mmc_wait_for_cmd);
> void mmc_set_data_timeout(struct mmc_data *data, const struct mmc_card
> *card)
> {
> unsigned int mult;
> + struct mmc_host *host = card->host;
>
> /*
> * SDIO cards only define an upper 1 s limit on access.
> @@ -659,6 +660,13 @@ void mmc_set_data_timeout(struct mmc_data *data,
> const struct mmc_card *card)
> return;
> }
>
> + /*
> + * For the CQE use case, the data transfer timeout will be set
> a maximum
> + * timeout value in HW timer in function sdhci_cqe_enable(),
> so, no need
> + * to go through the below algorithm.
> + */
> + if (host->cqe_enabled && !host->hsq_enabled)
> + return;
Are you really sure the timeout isn't used (or could make sense to be
used for new cases)?
For example, we also have mtk-sd, which doesn't make use of sdhci_cqe_enable().
> /*
> * SD cards use a 100 multiplier rather than 10
> */
>
> I have another timeout change associated with data transfer as well, if
> this change is acceptible, I will submit it with that together.
>
> Kind regards,
> Bean
>
Kind regards
Uffe
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-15 12:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-07 15:12 [PATCH v1 0/2] Two nimor eMMc changes Bean Huo
2021-09-07 15:12 ` [PATCH v1 1/2] mmc: cqhci: Print out qcnt in case of timeout Bean Huo
2021-09-14 11:23 ` Ulf Hansson
2021-09-07 15:12 ` [PATCH v1 2/2] mmc: core: No need to calculate the timeout value for CQE data transmission Bean Huo
2021-09-14 8:13 ` Ulf Hansson
2021-09-15 9:54 ` Bean Huo
2021-09-15 12:48 ` Ulf Hansson [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAPDyKFpAjMwPbxew0FyHH9mLOTaPw01AL0fCCLDjSP0N=xQcaA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=ulf.hansson@linaro.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=avri.altman@wdc.com \
--cc=beanhuo@micron.com \
--cc=huobean@gmail.com \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).