[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPDyKFrAKuv2x-mnt-r=RWKZVci=mBTcJeG0=CfLtdG-voWyxw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 15:15:51 +0200
From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To: Chaotian Jing <chaotian.jing@...iatek.com>
Cc: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@...esas.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
linux-mmc <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
srv_heupstream <srv_heupstream@...iatek.com>,
Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mmc: mmc: use ops->card_busy() to check card status
in __mmc_switch()
On 19 May 2016 at 10:47, Chaotian Jing <chaotian.jing@...iatek.com> wrote:
> some MMC host do not support MMC_CAP_WAIT_WHILE_BUSY but provides
> ops->card_busy(), So, add this method to check card status after
> switch command.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chaotian Jing <chaotian.jing@...iatek.com>
Thanks, applied for next! (With some minor updates to the change log)
Kind regards
Uffe
> ---
> drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c b/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c
> index 62355bd..32de144 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c
> @@ -480,6 +480,7 @@ int __mmc_switch(struct mmc_card *card, u8 set, u8 index, u8 value,
> u32 status = 0;
> bool use_r1b_resp = use_busy_signal;
> bool expired = false;
> + bool busy = false;
>
> mmc_retune_hold(host);
>
> @@ -535,19 +536,24 @@ int __mmc_switch(struct mmc_card *card, u8 set, u8 index, u8 value,
> /* Must check status to be sure of no errors. */
> timeout = jiffies + msecs_to_jiffies(timeout_ms);
> do {
> + /*
> + * Due to the possibility of being preempted after
> + * sending the status command, check the expiration
> + * time first.
> + */
> + expired = time_after(jiffies, timeout);
> if (send_status) {
> - /*
> - * Due to the possibility of being preempted after
> - * sending the status command, check the expiration
> - * time first.
> - */
> - expired = time_after(jiffies, timeout);
> err = __mmc_send_status(card, &status, ignore_crc);
> if (err)
> goto out;
> }
> if ((host->caps & MMC_CAP_WAIT_WHILE_BUSY) && use_r1b_resp)
> break;
> + if (host->ops->card_busy) {
> + if (!host->ops->card_busy(host))
> + break;
> + busy = true;
> + }
> if (mmc_host_is_spi(host))
> break;
>
> @@ -556,19 +562,20 @@ int __mmc_switch(struct mmc_card *card, u8 set, u8 index, u8 value,
> * does'nt support MMC_CAP_WAIT_WHILE_BUSY, then we can only
> * rely on waiting for the stated timeout to be sufficient.
> */
> - if (!send_status) {
> + if (!send_status && !host->ops->card_busy) {
> mmc_delay(timeout_ms);
> goto out;
> }
>
> /* Timeout if the device never leaves the program state. */
> - if (expired && R1_CURRENT_STATE(status) == R1_STATE_PRG) {
> + if (expired &&
> + (R1_CURRENT_STATE(status) == R1_STATE_PRG || busy)) {
> pr_err("%s: Card stuck in programming state! %s\n",
> mmc_hostname(host), __func__);
> err = -ETIMEDOUT;
> goto out;
> }
> - } while (R1_CURRENT_STATE(status) == R1_STATE_PRG);
> + } while (R1_CURRENT_STATE(status) == R1_STATE_PRG || busy);
>
> err = mmc_switch_status_error(host, status);
> out:
> --
> 1.8.1.1.dirty
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists