[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPDyKFokoSw+udsGERhz+nJxpj41tVEyhBF9zLJtCU4itahTOw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 12:33:30 +0200
From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To: Chaotian Jing <chaotian.jing@...iatek.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
Cc: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@...sung.com>,
Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
"linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <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>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: Do not hold re-tuning during CMD6 commands
[...]
>> Below is the fail log of suspend fail.
>> the normal command tune result should be 0xffffff9ff, but some time, we
>> get the tune result of 0xffffffff, then we choose the 10 as the best
>> tune parameter, which is not stable.
>> I know that we should focus on why we get the result of 0xffffffff, this
>> may be result of device/host timing shifting while tuning. but what I
>> want to do is that when get a response CRC error, we can do re-tune to
>> recovery it, but not only return the -84 and cause suspend fail
>> eventually. if all hardware are perfect, then we don't need the re-tune
>> mechanism.
>
> Thanks for elaborating!
>
> Can you please also tell exactly which of the CMD6 commands in the
> suspend sequence that is triggering this problem? Cache flush? Power
> off notification?
You didn't answer this question. I would really like to know the
sequence of the commands you see that are being sent to the card
during suspend. And of course in particular what command that fails.
[...]
Kind regards
Uffe
Powered by blists - more mailing lists