* [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-pltfm: Fix timeout on t4240's sdhci controller @ 2013-03-07 8:05 Chunhe Lan 2013-03-07 16:30 ` Gala Kumar-B11780 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Chunhe Lan @ 2013-03-07 8:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linuxppc-dev; +Cc: kumar.gala, Chunhe Lan This patch fixes timeout problems on t4240's sdhci controller: mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25! mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25! mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25! Signed-off-by: Chunhe Lan <Chunhe.Lan@freescale•com> --- drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c | 1 + 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c index 3145a78..9db7b12 100644 --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c @@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ void sdhci_get_of_property(struct platform_device *pdev) if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,p2020-esdhc") || of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,p1010-esdhc") || + of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,t4240-esdhc") || of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,mpc8536-esdhc")) host->quirks |= SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_TIMEOUT_VAL; -- 1.7.6.5 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-pltfm: Fix timeout on t4240's sdhci controller 2013-03-07 8:05 [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-pltfm: Fix timeout on t4240's sdhci controller Chunhe Lan @ 2013-03-07 16:30 ` Gala Kumar-B11780 2013-03-08 2:57 ` Chunhe Lan 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Gala Kumar-B11780 @ 2013-03-07 16:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lan Chunhe-B25806; +Cc: <linuxppc-dev@lists•ozlabs.org> On Mar 7, 2013, at 2:05 AM, Chunhe Lan wrote: > This patch fixes timeout problems on t4240's sdhci controller: >=20 > mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25! > mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25! > mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25! >=20 > Signed-off-by: Chunhe Lan <Chunhe.Lan@freescale•com> > --- > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c | 1 + > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >=20 > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltf= m.c > index 3145a78..9db7b12 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c > @@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ void sdhci_get_of_property(struct platform_device *pdev= ) >=20 > if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,p2020-esdhc") || > of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,p1010-esdhc") || > + of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,t4240-esdhc") || > of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,mpc8536-esdhc")) > host->quirks |=3D SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_TIMEOUT_VAL; >=20 > --=20 > 1.7.6.5 >=20 Why does this occur? Is it a board issue? Is it a silicon issue? Is it d= ue to some erratum? Why T4 only? - k= ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-pltfm: Fix timeout on t4240's sdhci controller 2013-03-07 16:30 ` Gala Kumar-B11780 @ 2013-03-08 2:57 ` Chunhe Lan 2013-03-08 20:43 ` Gala Kumar-B11780 0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread From: Chunhe Lan @ 2013-03-08 2:57 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Gala Kumar-B11780; +Cc: <linuxppc-dev@lists•ozlabs.org> On 03/08/2013 12:30 AM, Gala Kumar-B11780 wrote: > On Mar 7, 2013, at 2:05 AM, Chunhe Lan wrote: > >> This patch fixes timeout problems on t4240's sdhci controller: >> >> mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25! >> mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25! >> mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25! >> >> Signed-off-by: Chunhe Lan <Chunhe.Lan@freescale•com> >> --- >> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c | 1 + >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c >> index 3145a78..9db7b12 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c >> @@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ void sdhci_get_of_property(struct platform_device *pdev) >> >> if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,p2020-esdhc") || >> of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,p1010-esdhc") || >> + of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,t4240-esdhc") || >> of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,mpc8536-esdhc")) >> host->quirks |= SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_TIMEOUT_VAL; >> >> -- >> 1.7.6.5 >> > > Why does this occur? Is it a board issue? Is it a silicon issue? Is it due to some erratum? Why T4 only? It would be the property of T4 hardware, and please see below the patch which locates the mail list of freescale: eSDHC: mmc:host host need long time to generate command complete interrupt According to Spec 2.0, command complete interrupt will generate within 150 SD-CLK. But this was not enough on T4240 board. So give it sufficient time to detect command timeout. 1000 * HZ will be enough, this value was test on all T4 board, all worked well. Signed-off-by: Jerry Huang <Chang-Ming.Huang@freescale•com> Signed-off-by: Haijun Zhang <Haijun.Zhang@freescale•com> Thanks, Chunhe > > - k ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-pltfm: Fix timeout on t4240's sdhci controller 2013-03-08 2:57 ` Chunhe Lan @ 2013-03-08 20:43 ` Gala Kumar-B11780 0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread From: Gala Kumar-B11780 @ 2013-03-08 20:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Lan Chunhe-B25806 Cc: Gala Kumar-B11780, <linuxppc-dev@lists•ozlabs.org> On Mar 7, 2013, at 8:57 PM, Chunhe Lan wrote: > On 03/08/2013 12:30 AM, Gala Kumar-B11780 wrote: >> On Mar 7, 2013, at 2:05 AM, Chunhe Lan wrote: >>=20 >>> This patch fixes timeout problems on t4240's sdhci controller: >>>=20 >>> mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25! >>> mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25! >>> mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25! >>>=20 >>> Signed-off-by: Chunhe Lan <Chunhe.Lan@freescale•com> >>> --- >>> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c | 1 + >>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>>=20 >>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pl= tfm.c >>> index 3145a78..9db7b12 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c >>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c >>> @@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ void sdhci_get_of_property(struct platform_device *pd= ev) >>>=20 >>> if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,p2020-esdhc") || >>> of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,p1010-esdhc") || >>> + of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,t4240-esdhc") || >>> of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,mpc8536-esdhc")) >>> host->quirks |=3D SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_TIMEOUT_VAL; >>>=20 >>> --=20 >>> 1.7.6.5 >>>=20 >>=20 >> Why does this occur? Is it a board issue? Is it a silicon issue? Is i= t due to some erratum? Why T4 only? > It would be the property of T4 hardware, and please see below the pat= ch which locates > the mail list of freescale: >=20 > eSDHC: mmc:host host need long time to generate command complete interrup= t >=20 > According to Spec 2.0, command complete interrupt will generate within 15= 0 SD-CLK. > But this was not enough on T4240 board. So give it sufficient time to det= ect command > timeout. 1000 * HZ will be enough, this value was test on all T4 board, a= ll worked well. >=20 > Signed-off-by: Jerry Huang <Chang-Ming.Huang@freescale•com> > Signed-off-by: Haijun Zhang <Haijun.Zhang@freescale•com> I still don't understand the explanation of the issue on T4. Why doesn't P= 4080, P5020, etc suffer from the issue? - k= ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-03-08 20:44 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2013-03-07 8:05 [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-pltfm: Fix timeout on t4240's sdhci controller Chunhe Lan 2013-03-07 16:30 ` Gala Kumar-B11780 2013-03-08 2:57 ` Chunhe Lan 2013-03-08 20:43 ` Gala Kumar-B11780
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox