From: Pierre Ossman <pierre@ossman.eu>
To: Martin Fuzzey <mfuzzey@gmail.com>
Cc: Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@pengutronix.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Questions on mmc_test suite
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2009 22:24:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090425222415.51c97cfa@mjolnir.ossman.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ba4215e10904150213o628cc9d1ke80bd6dd9bfad089@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2145 bytes --]
On Wed, 15 Apr 2009 11:13:44 +0200
Martin Fuzzey <mfuzzey@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm currently updating the mxcmmc driver for the i.MX21 platform
> [patches have been posted to the arm list] and have a couple of
> questions about the test suite.
>
> 1) I'm getting an error on testcase 10 (weird reads) which does reads
> of 3 to 512 bytes by steps of 7.
> Modifying the test so it continues in case of error shows that it
> _only_ fails on the 395 byte read.
>
> It fails with a software timeout (-110)
> The card sends the same response to CMD17 (READ_SINGLE_BLOCK) as the
> reads that work
> but hardware never indicates transfer complete.
>
> Changing the test to start at 395 makes it fail immediately (so not
> dependent on previous reads).
> Has anyone seen this before?
>
Nothing I recognize, no. Have you tested more than one card in case
it's a card bug?
> 2) I'm getting "Warning: Host did not wait for busy state to end" on
> the multiblock write tests (Tests 5 and 13) but they still pass.
> Seems to be timing related since this doesn't occur with MMC debugging enabled.
> My understanding of this is that the driver should wait for the
> hardware to stop signalling busy on the data line (response R1b) after
> sending
> command 12 (stop transmission) before replying - is this correct?
> However the MX2 SDHC doesn't have a register for this.
>
> Should I:
> a) ignore it? [apart from the testcase warning everything seems to work]
> b) try reading the data line as GPIO - seems a bit of a hack
> c) issue CMD13 (SEND_STATUS) from the driver to poll the card - seems
> to be the wrong layer.
>
> If b) is the way to go how long can the delay be - is polling
> acceptable or must it be interrupt driven?
>
I'd say a). If the hardware doesn't support it then I don't think we
can do that much better than the polling that mmc_block does.
Rgds
--
-- Pierre Ossman
WARNING: This correspondence is being monitored by the
Swedish government. Make sure your server uses encryption
for SMTP traffic and consider using PGP for end-to-end
encryption.
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-25 20:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-15 9:13 Martin Fuzzey
2009-04-25 20:24 ` Pierre Ossman [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=20090425222415.51c97cfa@mjolnir.ossman.eu \
--to=pierre@ossman.eu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mfuzzey@gmail.com \
--cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®