From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36EB219441 for ; Fri, 15 Dec 2023 09:03:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="PkYKlicv" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1702631020; x=1734167020; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=mOL+vEK4Ji+HG16Xw8nQ6HxXeMudKPy/CS7cF5Zf3kE=; b=PkYKlicviZn+0g5aSGrASKCwOO2WbPmxU0s1Omp0fUreTC7Vat3seRFR Y2bcznLgPFjm9ulC19beEYVdomMVaGbG8J85xzXgRRoBwO1V14wMnBDdA fmbvUiexao/A+QnYmZ7WPzJTNSn5Lg/Pmh5TkdKJ/Z1v4/EOkBmWMeLsY 0UDRU/2x/rv7exCn4vudwqBOFUCAyUKf8skOui0mIlAvr7GYyyms8ufim UO7KWBNEYb680DJWPGyde/C1jbQxXnP72C4Ed6yHoqvgmP5x93CAQ0YsI WKbAgA4JlVS1OV/b+UnE6qDagkYo2kY76ZL97cP/6uJKzW5JsvqTHhJI7 A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10924"; a="2091555" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.04,278,1695711600"; d="scan'208";a="2091555" Received: from orviesa001.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.141]) by orvoesa103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 15 Dec 2023 01:03:39 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.04,278,1695711600"; d="scan'208";a="22755349" Received: from ahunter6-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.0.2.15]) ([10.252.32.93]) by smtpauth.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 15 Dec 2023 01:03:36 -0800 Message-ID: <16b0353d-c892-452f-adfd-dba8fdb740e6@intel.com> Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2023 11:03:32 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: mmc_test: Add re-tuning test To: Avri Altman , Ulf Hansson Cc: "jorge@foundries.io" , "christian.loehle@arm.com" , "ricardo@foundries.io" , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" References: <20231214090902.43628-1-adrian.hunter@intel.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Adrian Hunter Organization: Intel Finland Oy, Registered Address: PL 281, 00181 Helsinki, Business Identity Code: 0357606 - 4, Domiciled in Helsinki In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 15/12/23 10:45, Avri Altman wrote: >> +static int mmc_test_retuning(struct mmc_test_card *test) { >> + if (!mmc_can_retune(test->card->host)) { >> + pr_info("%s: No retuning - test skipped\n", >> + mmc_hostname(test->card->host)); >> + return RESULT_UNSUP_HOST; >> + } >> + >> + return mmc_test_rnd_perf(test, 0, 0, 8192, 30, 1); >> } > I wonder if it would make sense to make a RPMB flavor for the re-tuning test? Perhaps, but maybe that could be done from user space / mmc-utils. > > Thanks, > Avri > >> >> /* >> @@ -2921,6 +2934,14 @@ static const struct mmc_test_case >> mmc_test_cases[] = { >> .run = mmc_test_cmds_during_write_cmd23_nonblock, >> .cleanup = mmc_test_area_cleanup, >> }, >> + >> + { >> + .name = "Re-tuning reliability", >> + .prepare = mmc_test_area_prepare, >> + .run = mmc_test_retuning, >> + .cleanup = mmc_test_area_cleanup, >> + }, >> + >> }; >> >> static DEFINE_MUTEX(mmc_test_lock); >> -- >> 2.34.1 >