[PATCH 0/3] mmc: Wait for card_busy before starting sdio requests

[hdegoede@redhat.com (Hans de Goede)]

Hi,

On 25-09-15 11:58, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
> On 09/25/2015 06:41 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 25-09-15 11:37, Jaehoon Chung wrote:
>>> Hi, Hans.
>>>
>>> On 09/25/2015 04:53 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On 24-09-15 18:04, Doug Anderson wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 2:19 AM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 23-09-15 23:43, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 22 September 2015 at 17:30, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Ulf,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Here is a non RFC version of my patch-set to wait for card_busy before
>>>>>>>> starting sdio requests. It is the same as the RFC version of the set,
>>>>>>>> but this time it has been tested no hardware which actually needs this
>>>>>>>> and I can confirm now that this fixes wifi on that hardware.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Great! Thanks, applied for next!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Great, thanks, I guess it is too late for this to go as a fix into
>>>>>> 4.3-rcX (no worries if it is) ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This patch-set should also allow removing this dw_mmc specific fix:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c?id=0bdbd0e88cf6b603a2196418672715b0890fb040
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As this patch-set fixes this problem in a generic manner.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Care to send a patch to remove the above hack/fix?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I do not have any hardware to test this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've added Doug the original author of that patch to the Cc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Dough, can you test if with the patch set from this mail thread
>>>>>> (merged into mmc/next) this patch:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c?id=0bdbd0e88cf6b603a2196418672715b0890fb040
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is still necessary ? Since this patch-set fixes the same issue
>>>>>> in the mmc core I believe that this commit can be reverted now.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll try to find some time in the next few days to test, but I'm not
>>>>> terribly hopeful we can just revert the patch because:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Only one of the two callers of dw_mci_wait_while_busy() is handled
>>>>> by your patch.  mci_send_cmd() is used internally in dw_mmc to throw
>>>>> something in the CMD register without going through the normal MMC
>>>>> path.  This is used exclusively to update the clock registers in
>>>>> dw_mmc.  I'm pretty sure this needs the wait, too.  It's always seemed
>>>>> weird / awkward to me that you need to use the CMD register to update
>>>>> clock settings in dw_mmc, but c'est la vie.
>>>>
>>>> I would not expect the card to signal busy when trying to change clocks
>>>> though, so I do not think this will really be a problem.
>>>
>>> No. It shouldn't be occurred any problem.
>>> But according to designware TRM, it needs to check whether card is busy or not, before updating clock.
>>> I think even if problem will not occur, it doesn't mean this code is useless.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 2. If I remember correctly, we ran into other instances where non-SDIO
>>>>> cards needed the busy check.  It wasn't terribly common, but I think I
>>>>> ran into this when stress testing, but only on a few cards.
>>>>
>>>> Hmm, that would be a problem yes.
>>>>
>>>>> The patch referenced here only seems to check for SDIO commands.  As I
>>>>> understand it, to be correct, it should check for all data commands
>>>>> (other than stop or voltage change commands).
>>>>
>>>> But that is not what the patch does, it actually waits for all commands,
>>>> including non data commands. An earlier attempt of mine to fix the sdio
>>>> wifi issues with the sunxi driver copied your approach, and I actually
>>>> got reports of regressions with using normal micro-sd memory cards
>>>> from several people testing that patch.
>>>
>>> I can't see any problem reported at mailing list.
>>> Could you share more information what regressions issue?
>>
>> IIRC people where hitting the timeout in the code to wait for the card-busy.
>>
>> Now that I think about this, this may have been caused by waiting
>> for card-busy while sending a stop.
>
> I understood what problem you said.
> Well, but i don't accept your opinion yet.
> Is that case reproduced with dwmmc controller? otherwise...sunxi driver?
> (It seems that you mentioned the case of sunxi driver.)

I was talking about the sunxi driver only. A few weeks back I did a
patch for the sunxi driver which copied the dw-mmc fix, and some users
testing that saw issues accessing certain micro-sd memory cards.

Regards,

Hans