lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <m2d3h7b8pv.fsf@bob.laptop.org>
Date:	Mon, 18 Jul 2011 17:05:32 -0400
From:	Chris Ball <cjb@...top.org>
To:	Manoj Iyer <manoj.iyer@...onical.com>
Cc:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org, matsumur@....ricoh.co.jp,
	linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: Added quirks for Ricoh 1180:e823 lower base clock frequency

Hi Manoj,

On Mon, Jul 18 2011, Manoj Iyer wrote:
> Right, without the patch I get..
>
> [   52.526665] mmc0: new SDHC card at address e624
> [   52.571228] mmcblk0: mmc0:e624 SD16G 14.8 GiB
> [   52.591071] mmcblk0: retrying using single block read
> [   52.593105] mmcblk0: error -84 transferring data, sector 0, nr 8,
> card status 0x900
> [   52.593109] end_request: I/O error, dev mmcblk0, sector 0
> [   52.594594] mmcblk0: error -84 transferring data, sector 1, nr 7,
> card status 0x900
> [   52.594604] end_request: I/O error, dev mmcblk0, sector 1
> [   52.602893] quiet_error: 24 callbacks suppressed
> [   52.602902] Buffer I/O error on device mmcblk0, logical block 0
> [   52.605349] ldm_validate_partition_table(): Disk read failed.
> [   52.605384] Dev mmcblk0: unable to read RDB block 0
> [   52.607729]  mmcblk0: unable to read partition table
> u@u:~$
>
> So, I cannot generate any comparison data with this SD card.

I see, thanks.  So we're lacking any data on what speed the card would
normally provide.  Perhaps you could try that card on a different
controller, just so we're able to see whether it's usually possible
to get closer to 45M/sec with it?

I think I'll take your patch as-is for 3.1 -- since if there is a
performance degradation, it's on cards that simply don't work at all
right now -- and if you're able to work on a followup patch that only
performs the clock-lowering after the first error, I think that'd be a
handy patch to have around.  Does that sound good?

Thanks!

- Chris.
-- 
Chris Ball   <cjb@...top.org>   <http://printf.net/>
One Laptop Per Child
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ