[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fd7ac744-a6dc-9f1f-c13f-96faca14d75b@ti.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 2021 19:43:22 +0530
From: Aswath Govindraju <a-govindraju@...com>
To: Nishanth Menon <nm@...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
Hi Nishanth,
On 25/01/21 7:21 pm, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> 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..
>
Yes there are tests which confirm that claimed speeds are functional. I
will add them in the respin.
Thanks,
Aswath
Powered by blists - more mailing lists