linux-mmc.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@stericsson.com>
To: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Cc: "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>,
	Chris Ball <cjb@laptop.org>,
	Per FORLIN <per.forlin@stericsson.com>,
	Johan RUDHOLM <johan.rudholm@stericsson.com>,
	Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: Force a "detect" to handle non-properly removed cards
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 12:02:26 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F0AC942.4060404@stericsson.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F04C412.1030604@intel.com>

Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 3/01/2012 12:33 p.m., Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> Removing a card "slowly" can trigger a GPIO irq to be raised far
>> before the card is actually removed. This means the scheduled
>> detect work will not find out that the card were removed and thus
>> the card and the block device will not be unregistered.
> 
> One way around that problem is to error out requests after the GPIO
> indicates the card is "removed".  sdhci effectively does that but with
> a "present" bit.  Perhaps even simpler - set the card-removed flag.

I get the idea, but that will only partly solve this issue.

My concern is more about what we actually can trust; either the GPIO irq 
which likely is giving more than one irq when inserting/removing a card 
since the slot is probably not glitch free, or that a "rescan" runs to 
make sure a CMD13 is accepted from the previously inserted card.

Moreover, the issue this patch tries to solve can not be solved without 
doing a "rescan" which must be triggered from the the block layer some 
how. I thought this new function that you previously added 
"mmc_detect_card_remove" was the proper place to do this.

> 
>> Let the mmc_detect_card_removed function trigger a new detect
>> work immediately when it discovers that a card has been removed.
> 
> This is changing some long-standing functionality i.e. the card is not 
> removed
> without a card detect event.  It is difficult to know whether that will 
> be very
> bad for poor quality cards,

Doing a mmc_detect (rescan) will in the end just issue a CMD13 to the 
card to make sure it is still present, that is already done from the 
block layer after each read/write request. So I can not see that "poor 
quality cards" will have any further problem with this patch, but I 
might miss something!?

> 
>> This will solve the described issue above. Moreover we make sure
>> the detect work is executed as soon as possible, since there is
>> no reason for waiting for a "delayed" detect to happen.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson<ulf.hansson@stericsson.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/mmc/core/core.c  |   24 +++++++++++++-----------
>>   include/linux/mmc/host.h |    1 -
>>   2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
>> index 4770807..7bc02f4 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
>> @@ -1462,7 +1462,6 @@ void mmc_detect_change(struct mmc_host *host, unsigned long delay)
>>   	WARN_ON(host->removed);
>>   	spin_unlock_irqrestore(&host->lock, flags);
>>   #endif
>> -	host->detect_change = 1;
>>   	mmc_schedule_delayed_work(&host->detect, delay);
>>   }
>>
>> @@ -2077,18 +2076,23 @@ int _mmc_detect_card_removed(struct mmc_host *host)
>>   int mmc_detect_card_removed(struct mmc_host *host)
>>   {
>>   	struct mmc_card *card = host->card;
>> +	int ret = 1;
>>
>>   	WARN_ON(!host->claimed);
>> -	/*
>> -	 * The card will be considered unchanged unless we have been asked to
>> -	 * detect a change or host requires polling to provide card detection.
>> -	 */
>> -	if (card&&  !host->detect_change&&  !(host->caps&  MMC_CAP_NEEDS_POLL))
>> -		return mmc_card_removed(card);
>>
>> -	host->detect_change = 0;
>> +	if (card&&  !mmc_card_removed(card)) {
>> +		if (_mmc_detect_card_removed(host)) {
>> +			/*
>> +			 * Make sure a detect work is always executed and also
>> +			 * do it as soon as possible.
>> +			 */
>> +			cancel_delayed_work(&host->detect);
>> +			mmc_detect_change(host, 0);
>> +		}
>> +		ret = mmc_card_removed(card);
>> +	}
>>
>> -	return _mmc_detect_card_removed(host);
>> +	return ret;
>>   }
>>   EXPORT_SYMBOL(mmc_detect_card_removed);
>>
>> @@ -2112,8 +2116,6 @@ void mmc_rescan(struct work_struct *work)
>>   	&&  !(host->caps&  MMC_CAP_NONREMOVABLE))
>>   		host->bus_ops->detect(host);
>>
>> -	host->detect_change = 0;
>> -
>>   	/*
>>   	 * Let mmc_bus_put() free the bus/bus_ops if we've found that
>>   	 * the card is no longer present.
>> diff --git a/include/linux/mmc/host.h b/include/linux/mmc/host.h
>> index 031d865..09fa5e6 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/mmc/host.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/mmc/host.h
>> @@ -305,7 +305,6 @@ struct mmc_host {
>>   	int			claim_cnt;	/* "claim" nesting count */
>>
>>   	struct delayed_work	detect;
>> -	int			detect_change;	/* card detect flag */
>>   	struct mmc_hotplug	hotplug;
>>
>>   	const struct mmc_bus_ops *bus_ops;	/* current bus driver */
> 
> 

Br
Ulf Hansson

  reply	other threads:[~2012-01-09 11:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-01-03 10:33 [PATCH] mmc: core: Force a "detect" to handle non-properly removed cards Ulf Hansson
2012-01-04  9:40 ` Linus Walleij
2012-01-04 21:26 ` Adrian Hunter
2012-01-09 11:02   ` Ulf Hansson [this message]
2012-01-09 12:07     ` Adrian Hunter
2012-01-09 13:14       ` Ulf Hansson
2012-01-09 13:53         ` Adrian Hunter
2012-01-09 14:27           ` Ulf Hansson
2012-01-10  9:22             ` Adrian Hunter
2012-01-10 10:59               ` Ulf Hansson
2012-01-10 12:10                 ` Adrian Hunter
2012-01-13 10:04                   ` Ulf Hansson
2012-01-13 10:43                     ` Adrian Hunter
2012-01-13 11:31                       ` Ulf Hansson
2012-01-13 12:08                         ` Adrian Hunter
2012-01-13 13:14                           ` Ulf Hansson
2012-01-13 13:43                             ` Adrian Hunter
2012-01-13 14:35                               ` Ulf Hansson
2012-01-16  7:45                                 ` Adrian Hunter
2012-01-16 11:09                                   ` Ulf Hansson
2012-01-10  9:33             ` Adrian Hunter
2012-01-10 11:03               ` Ulf Hansson
2012-01-10 12:21                 ` Adrian Hunter
2012-01-09 14:34           ` Ulf Hansson

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4F0AC942.4060404@stericsson.com \
    --to=ulf.hansson@stericsson.com \
    --cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
    --cc=cjb@laptop.org \
    --cc=johan.rudholm@stericsson.com \
    --cc=lee.jones@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=per.forlin@stericsson.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).