[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <5746748B.7080305@samsung.com>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 12:59:07 +0900
From: Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@...sung.com>
To: Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com>
Cc: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@...omium.org>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>,
Alexandru Stan <amstan@...omium.org>,
"open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." <linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: dw_mmc: Consider HLE errors to be data and command
errors
On 05/26/2016 11:23 AM, Shawn Lin wrote:
> Hi Jaehoon,
>
> On 2016/5/19 21:07, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
>> On 05/19/2016 08:31 PM, Shawn Lin wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 2016/5/19 1:37, Doug Anderson wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 2:14 AM, Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2016-5-18 12:12, Doug Anderson wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 6:59 PM, Shawn Lin
>>>>>> <shawn.lin@...nel-upstream.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Could you try this patch to see if you can still find HLE?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> @@ -2356,12 +2356,22 @@ static void dw_mci_cmd_interrupt(struct dw_mci
>>>>>>> *host, u32 status)
>>>>>>> static void dw_mci_handle_cd(struct dw_mci *host)
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>> int i;
>>>>>>> + int present;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> for (i = 0; i < host->num_slots; i++) {
>>>>>>> struct dw_mci_slot *slot = host->slot[i];
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> if (!slot)
>>>>>>> continue;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> + present = !(mci_readl(slot->host, CDETECT) & (1 <<
>>>>>>> slot->id));
>>>>>>> + if (present)
>>>>>>> + set_bit(DW_MMC_CARD_PRESENT, &slot->flags);
>>>>>>> + else
>>>>>>> + clear_bit(DW_MMC_CARD_PRESENT, &slot->flags);
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, because we don't use the builtin card detect on veyron. ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We use GPIO card detect because we didn't like the way JTAG and SD
>>>>>> interacted. Also on rk3288 the builtin card detect line had the wrong
>>>>>> voltage domain (you couldn't detect a card when the IO lines were
>>>>>> powered off). The builtin card detect line is always driven low on
>>>>>> veyron.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Okay, I see.
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm nearly certain that the root cause of my HLE errors is actually
>>>>>> related to the same problem addressed by the commit 7c5209c315ea
>>>>>> ("mmc: core: Increase delay for voltage to stabilize from 3.3V to
>>>>>> 1.8V"). I think that on minnie we're still on the hairy edge and
>>>>>> sometimes the line doesn't transition fast enough.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Things are not so simple from your details.
>>>>>
>>>>> I was not enabling SD3.0 support, then I also found HLE sometimes.
>>>>> So it seems commit 7c5209c315ea does not contibute to this phenomenon.
>>>>
>>>> Just to clarify, in my case commit 7c5209c315ea didn't make the
>>>> problem worse, but made it better. Just not better enough. ;)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> The scenario looks like:
>>>>> remove sd-card -> mmc_sd_detect -> send status(CMD13) ->power_off ->
>>>>> set_ios -> setup_bus -> disabled clk , then HLE irq storm coming
>>>>>
>>>>> From the code of dw_mci_prepare_command:
>>>>> SDMMC_CMD_PRV_DAT_WAIT will not be used for CMD13, so we don't
>>>>> wait_busy here, then cmd code is loding into queue of dw_mmc but
>>>>> still failing send out because it's in busy?
>>>>>
>>>>> With my patch, things go well:
>>>>> remove sd-card -> clear bit of DW_MMC_CARD_PRESENT -> send
>>>>> status(CMD13) return directly -> power_off -> set_ios -> setup_bus ->
>>>>> disable clk
>>>>>
>>>>> So why should we allow inquiry of card status if we sure the card is
>>>>> removed? I mean no any further cmds should be delivered.
>>>>
>>>> Quite honestly just dealing with the HLE error (my patch or
>>>> equivalent) might be a sane solution for the problem you describe.
>>>
>>> Yes, your patch looks good to me, so it should be merged firstly. :)
>>> Then let's push it a bit further more that when HLEs are coming,
>>> somethings must be wrong(currently I don't see a obvious clue from
>>> the code itself although, I'm prone to think it belongs to the
>>> software issue).
>>
>> We don't know what's main cause for HLE..But i also think it's relevant to SW issue.
>> But we need to consider all possibilities..
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> dw_mmc needs to be able to work with an external card detect GPIO.
>>>> It's been part of the dw_mmc driver for a long time and is (in fact)
>>>> in use upstream at least by rk3288-veyron. Any solution that only
>>>> works for internal card detect is not enough. Just handling the HLE
>>>> error to deal with the interrupt storm and then letting Linux remove
>>>> the card (because of the card detect interrupt) seems totally OK to
>>>> me.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Sure, some of rockchip Socs use gpio for CD because they don't
>>> have a internal CD, such as RK3036, right?
>>>
>>>> Note: I'd be very curious if your problems get better if you disable
>>>
>>> Not at all.
>>>
>>>> the "grf_force_jtag" bit in the GRF. If you're using the builtin card
>>>> detect and you use the boot default of "grf_force_jtag" then your pins
>>>> will be unmuxed behind your back when the card is ejected. This could
>>>> be causing the dw_mmc controller to get confused.
>>>
>>> Right, grf_force_jtag is also not a friend of mine. :)
>>> So I had disabled this function before I was debugging it.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> And another question: should we wait busy for cmd13?
>>>>
>>>> I don't think so. As I understand it CMD13 uses only the CMD line for
>>>> communication and it should be appropriate to send this when the bus
>>>> is "busy" (which means that the DATA lines are low).
>>>
>>> Ahh... take back my question.. I was just considering a wired situation
>>> that pins are unmuxed on the background(cmd line as well) when cmd13 is
>>> delivering....
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Also: it seems odd that the HLE IRQ storm didn't come right after the
>>>> CMD 13 in your description above. Are you sure it was the CMD 13 that
>>>> caused the HLEs, or could it has been something else?
>>>
>>> Actually no. Any cmds be issued can trigger HLEs, I think, after sd card is removed When I hacked mmc_sd_detecd to send other cmds intead
>>> of cmd13.
>>>
>>> From dw_mmc databook v270a(7.2.3 Clock Programming) we can see:
>>> The DWC_mobile_storage loads each of these registers only when the
>>> start_cmd bit and the Update_clk_regs_only bit in the CMD register are
>>> set. When a command is successfully loaded, the DWC_mobile_storage
>>> clears this bit, unless the DWC_mobile_storage already has another
>>> command in the queue, at which point it gives an HLE (Hardware Locked
>>> Error); for details on HLEs, refer to “Error Handling” on page 233.
>>> Software should look for the start_cmd and the Update_clk_regs_only
>>> bits, and should also set the wait_prvdata_complete bit to ensure that
>>> clock parameters do not change during data transfer.
>>>
>>> Maybe the cmd is trying to load(or somethings wrong with the
>>> controller?) when we disable the clk? That may explain my observation
>>> that HLEs came after disabling clk.
>>
>> I agreed.
>>
>> To Disable clock, it sends cmd with update_clk_regs_only and wait_prvdata_complete bit.
>> I think it's problem..(waiting for prvdata..)
>>
>> If there are ongoing some data(read/write), then before disabling clock, waiting for completing previous data.
>> (But card was already removed, and it couldn't do anything.)
>> It's difficult to analyze the HLE..So After applying first, then we can solve this problem, step by step.
>>
>
> I saw you send a PR for v4.7-fix to Ulf which didn't include this one.
> Do you plan to add it into 4.8 materials? :)
Yes, I think good that this is prepared for next. (Will apply on this weekend.)
Do you have other opinion? :)
If you have other opinion, i will reflect yours. Thanks!
Best Regards,
Jaehoon Chung
>
>> Best Regards,
>> Jaehoon Chung
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -Doug
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists