linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] mmc: core: API for temporarily disabling auto-retuning due to errors

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]

Date:   Tue, 28 May 2019 13:21:59 +0200
From:   Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com>
To:     Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
        Double Lo <double.lo@...ress.com>, briannorris@...omium.org,
        Madhan Mohan R <madhanmohan.r@...ress.com>, mka@...omium.org,
        Wright Feng <wright.feng@...ress.com>,
        Chi-Hsien Lin <chi-hsien.lin@...ress.com>,
        Jiong Wu <lohengrin1024@...il.com>,
        Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@...eaurora.org>,
        linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
        Avri Altman <avri.altman@....com>, Martin Hicks <mort@...k.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mmc: core: API for temporarily disabling
 auto-retuning due to errors



On 5/28/2019 12:04 PM, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 26/05/19 9:42 PM, Arend Van Spriel wrote:
>> On 5/18/2019 12:54 AM, Douglas Anderson wrote:
>>> Normally when the MMC core sees an "-EILSEQ" error returned by a host
>>> controller then it will trigger a retuning of the card.  This is
>>> generally a good idea.
>>
>> Probably a question for Adrian, but how is this retuning scheduled. I recall
>> seeing something in mmc_request_done. How about deferring the retuning upon
>> a release host or is that too sdio specific.
> 
> Below is what I have been carrying the last 4 years.  But according to Douglas'
> patch, the release would need to be further down.  See 2nd diff below.
> Would that work?

That makes sense. The loop is needed because the device can be a bit 
bone headed. So indeed after the loop the device should be awake and 
able to handle CMD19.

Regards,
Arend