* [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-sprd: Fix minimum clock limit @ 2022-10-11 6:30 Wenchao Chen 2022-10-11 6:45 ` Adrian Hunter 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Wenchao Chen @ 2022-10-11 6:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: adrian.hunter, ulf.hansson, orsonzhai, baolin.wang, zhang.lyra Cc: linux-mmc, linux-kernel, megoo.tang, lzx.stg From: Wenchao Chen <wenchao.chen@unisoc.com> The minimum clock supported by SPRD Host is 100000. Signed-off-by: Wenchao Chen <wenchao.chen@unisoc.com> --- drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c index 46c55ab4884c..b92a408f138d 100644 --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c @@ -309,7 +309,7 @@ static unsigned int sdhci_sprd_get_max_clock(struct sdhci_host *host) static unsigned int sdhci_sprd_get_min_clock(struct sdhci_host *host) { - return 400000; + return 100000; } static void sdhci_sprd_set_uhs_signaling(struct sdhci_host *host, -- 2.17.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-sprd: Fix minimum clock limit 2022-10-11 6:30 [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-sprd: Fix minimum clock limit Wenchao Chen @ 2022-10-11 6:45 ` Adrian Hunter 2022-10-11 8:40 ` Wenchao Chen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Adrian Hunter @ 2022-10-11 6:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Wenchao Chen, ulf.hansson, orsonzhai, baolin.wang, zhang.lyra Cc: linux-mmc, linux-kernel, megoo.tang, lzx.stg On 11/10/22 09:30, Wenchao Chen wrote: > From: Wenchao Chen <wenchao.chen@unisoc.com> > > The minimum clock supported by SPRD Host is 100000. Commit messages are better if they say why a change is being made. This begs the question, was there a problem with 400 kHz? Are there cases that benefit from this change? Should it have a fixes tag,cc stable? > > Signed-off-by: Wenchao Chen <wenchao.chen@unisoc.com> > --- > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c > index 46c55ab4884c..b92a408f138d 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c > @@ -309,7 +309,7 @@ static unsigned int sdhci_sprd_get_max_clock(struct sdhci_host *host) > > static unsigned int sdhci_sprd_get_min_clock(struct sdhci_host *host) > { > - return 400000; > + return 100000; > } > > static void sdhci_sprd_set_uhs_signaling(struct sdhci_host *host, ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-sprd: Fix minimum clock limit 2022-10-11 6:45 ` Adrian Hunter @ 2022-10-11 8:40 ` Wenchao Chen 2022-10-11 8:48 ` Adrian Hunter 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Wenchao Chen @ 2022-10-11 8:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Adrian Hunter Cc: ulf.hansson, orsonzhai, baolin.wang, zhang.lyra, linux-mmc, linux-kernel, megoo.tang, lzx.stg On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 2:45 PM Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com> wrote: > > On 11/10/22 09:30, Wenchao Chen wrote: > > From: Wenchao Chen <wenchao.chen@unisoc.com> > > > > The minimum clock supported by SPRD Host is 100000. > > Commit messages are better if they say why a change > is being made. > > This begs the question, was there a problem with 400 kHz? > Are there cases that benefit from this change? > Should it have a fixes tag,cc stable? > Code show as below: static struct sdhci_ops sdhci_sprd_ops = { ... .get_min_clock = sdhci_sprd_get_min_clock, ... }; int sdhci_setup_host(struct sdhci_host *host) { ... if (host->ops->get_min_clock) mmc->f_min = host->ops->get_min_clock(host); ... } static const unsigned freqs[] = { 400000, 300000, 200000, 100000 }; void mmc_rescan(struct work_struct *work) { ... for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(freqs); i++) { unsigned int freq = freqs[i]; if (freq > host->f_max) { if (i + 1 < ARRAY_SIZE(freqs)) continue; freq = host->f_max; } if (!mmc_rescan_try_freq(host, max(freq, host->f_min))) break; if (freqs[i] <= host->f_min) // If you start at 100K, you will try 400K, 300K, 200K, 100K. break; } ... } Our controller supports 100K. During the test, it was found that mmc_rescan failed to scan the card at 400K, and did not try 300K, 200K, and 100K. After modifying the minimum clock limit to 100K, the card scan was successful. > > > > Signed-off-by: Wenchao Chen <wenchao.chen@unisoc.com> > > --- > > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c > > index 46c55ab4884c..b92a408f138d 100644 > > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c > > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c > > @@ -309,7 +309,7 @@ static unsigned int sdhci_sprd_get_max_clock(struct sdhci_host *host) > > > > static unsigned int sdhci_sprd_get_min_clock(struct sdhci_host *host) > > { > > - return 400000; > > + return 100000; > > } > > > > static void sdhci_sprd_set_uhs_signaling(struct sdhci_host *host, > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-sprd: Fix minimum clock limit 2022-10-11 8:40 ` Wenchao Chen @ 2022-10-11 8:48 ` Adrian Hunter 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Adrian Hunter @ 2022-10-11 8:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Wenchao Chen Cc: ulf.hansson, orsonzhai, baolin.wang, zhang.lyra, linux-mmc, linux-kernel, megoo.tang, lzx.stg On 11/10/22 11:40, Wenchao Chen wrote: > On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 2:45 PM Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com> wrote: >> >> On 11/10/22 09:30, Wenchao Chen wrote: >>> From: Wenchao Chen <wenchao.chen@unisoc.com> >>> >>> The minimum clock supported by SPRD Host is 100000. >> >> Commit messages are better if they say why a change >> is being made. >> >> This begs the question, was there a problem with 400 kHz? >> Are there cases that benefit from this change? >> Should it have a fixes tag,cc stable? >> > > Code show as below: > static struct sdhci_ops sdhci_sprd_ops = { > ... > .get_min_clock = sdhci_sprd_get_min_clock, > ... > }; > > int sdhci_setup_host(struct sdhci_host *host) > { > ... > if (host->ops->get_min_clock) > mmc->f_min = host->ops->get_min_clock(host); > ... > } > > static const unsigned freqs[] = { 400000, 300000, 200000, 100000 }; > void mmc_rescan(struct work_struct *work) > { > ... > for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(freqs); i++) { > unsigned int freq = freqs[i]; > if (freq > host->f_max) { > if (i + 1 < ARRAY_SIZE(freqs)) > continue; > freq = host->f_max; > } > if (!mmc_rescan_try_freq(host, max(freq, host->f_min))) > break; > if (freqs[i] <= host->f_min) // If you start at 100K, you will try > 400K, 300K, 200K, 100K. > break; > } > ... > } > > Our controller supports 100K. During the test, it was found that mmc_rescan > failed to scan the card at 400K, and did not try 300K, 200K, and 100K. After > modifying the minimum clock limit to 100K, the card scan was successful. Please add those last 3 lines to the commit message, then you can add: Acked-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com> Also please consider adding a Fixes: tag. > >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Wenchao Chen <wenchao.chen@unisoc.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c >>> index 46c55ab4884c..b92a408f138d 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c >>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-sprd.c >>> @@ -309,7 +309,7 @@ static unsigned int sdhci_sprd_get_max_clock(struct sdhci_host *host) >>> >>> static unsigned int sdhci_sprd_get_min_clock(struct sdhci_host *host) >>> { >>> - return 400000; >>> + return 100000; >>> } >>> >>> static void sdhci_sprd_set_uhs_signaling(struct sdhci_host *host, >> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-10-11 8:48 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2022-10-11 6:30 [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-sprd: Fix minimum clock limit Wenchao Chen 2022-10-11 6:45 ` Adrian Hunter 2022-10-11 8:40 ` Wenchao Chen 2022-10-11 8:48 ` Adrian Hunter
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®