linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] mmc: J7200: Add support for higher speed modes in MMCSD subsystems

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:   Mon, 25 Jan 2021 07:51:12 -0600
From:   Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
To:     Aswath Govindraju <a-govindraju@...com>
CC:     Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@...com>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
        Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>,
        Tero Kristo <kristo@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] mmc: J7200: Add support for higher speed modes in
 MMCSD subsystems

On 19:12-20210125, Aswath Govindraju wrote:
> Hi Nishanth,
> 
> On 22/01/21 11:36 pm, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> > On 21:54-20210122, Aswath Govindraju wrote:
> >> The following series of patches
> >> - adds support for HS200 and HS400 speed modes in MMCSD0 subsystem
> >> - adds support for UHS-I speed modes in MMCSD1 subsystem 
> >>
> >> Aswath Govindraju (2):
> >>   arm64: dts: ti: k3-j7200-main: Add support for HS200 and HS400 modes
> >>     in MMCSD0 subsystem
> >>   arm64: dts: ti: k3-j7200-main: Add support for UHS-I modes in MMCSD1
> >>     subsystem
> > 
> > 
> > Just a curious couple of questions:
> > Does squashing both the patches create a problem for understanding or a
> > later bisect? I kind of thought these mostly go hand in hand between the
> > instances, am I mistaken?
> > 
> 
> Yes, they can be squashed. I post a respin doing this.

Thanks.

> 
> > Are there any otap delay params update needed or the defaults are good
> > to go?
> > 
> 
> The otap values are already up-to-date with the data sheet and don't
> need updation.

Thanks for the clarification.

> 
> > Will also help to provide some verification log along with this.
> > 
> 
> May I know what sort of logs would be best to provide. Would enumeration
> logs during boot suffice ?
> 
> Like this,
> https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/v9NRV7GwMw/ ?

That just says we detected the cards, no?
I thought we had tests around this? Something including /sys/kernel/debug/mmc*/ios

Something that demonstrates that this actually runs at the claimed
speeds? That would be nice on linux-next, if possible as well..

-- 
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
Key (0xDDB5849D1736249D) / Fingerprint: F8A2 8693 54EB 8232 17A3  1A34 DDB5 849D 1736 249D