From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Ball Subject: Re: [Bug 39822] SDHC cards no longer recognized on AT91 based board Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 19:48:27 -0400 Message-ID: References: <201107282323.p6SNN9Jk026454@demeter1.kernel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from void.printf.net ([89.145.121.20]:38139 "EHLO void.printf.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756213Ab1G1XtN (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jul 2011 19:49:13 -0400 In-Reply-To: <201107282323.p6SNN9Jk026454@demeter1.kernel.org> (bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org's message of "Thu, 28 Jul 2011 23:23:09 GMT") Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org To: dgilbert@interlog.com Cc: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, Nicolas Ferre , Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD , ludovic.desroches@atmel.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org Hi, thanks for the bug report. Adding linux-mmc@ and some atmel driver folks to CC. On Thu, Jul 28 2011, bugzilla-daemon@bugzilla.kernel.org wrote: > Prior to 3.0.0 the FoxG20 board (Atmel AT91SAM9G20) could boot and use > both micro SD and SDHC card to contain its root file system. With the > advent of the 3.0.0 kernel the micro SDHC card is unable to mount the > root file system. > > Comparing the relevant part of dmesg for 2.6.38.6 (and it worked on > 2.6.39): > ... > Waiting for root device /dev/mmcblk0p2... > mmc0: host does not support reading read-only switch. assuming write-enable. > at91_mci at91_mci: Timeout waiting end of packet > mmc0: new SDHC card at address 1234 > mmcblk0: mmc0:1234 SA04G 3.67 GiB > mmcblk0: p1 p2 p3 > ... > > to the same dmesg section for 3.0.0 : > ... > Waiting for root device /dev/mmcblk0p2... > mmc0: error -110 whilst initialising SD card > at91_mci at91_mci: Timeout waiting end of packet > mmc0: error -110 whilst initialising SD card > [no further progress] > > Non "HC" SD cards work as expected in 3.0.0 If no-one on the CC list has any ideas, would you be interested in trying to bisect this change? Another possibility would be adding printks before all of the -ETIMEDOUT lines in core/* and host/at*, in order to see which one you're hitting (and therefore which operation is causing the initialization to fail). But a full bisection would be more conclusive. Thanks, - Chris. -- Chris Ball One Laptop Per Child