* [PATCH] mmc: core: fix the aysync mechanism when card removed @ 2013-01-22 12:18 Jaehoon Chung 2013-01-31 7:06 ` Jaehoon Chung 2013-01-31 8:42 ` Subhash Jadavani 0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Jaehoon Chung @ 2013-01-22 12:18 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-mmc Cc: Chris Ball, Konstantin Dorfman, Kyungmin Park, Per FORLIN, Maya Erez When card removed, then didn't complete the previously data. (It didn't wakeup any interrupt.) If card is removed, then we can assume to complete the previously data. And wakeup the interrupt for wait_event of data. This problem is produced when sd-card is removed.(Sd-card is running some operation) Signed-off-by: Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <Kyungmin.park@samsung.com> --- drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++----------- 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c index 8b3a122..bc1d627 100644 --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c @@ -515,17 +515,26 @@ struct mmc_async_req *mmc_start_req(struct mmc_host *host, mmc_pre_req(host, areq->mrq, !host->areq); if (host->areq) { - err = mmc_wait_for_data_req_done(host, host->areq->mrq, - areq); - if (err == MMC_BLK_NEW_REQUEST) { - if (error) - *error = err; - /* - * The previous request was not completed, - * nothing to return - */ - return NULL; - } + err = mmc_wait_for_data_req_done(host, host->areq->mrq, + areq); + if (err == MMC_BLK_NEW_REQUEST) { + if (error) + *error = err; + /* + * The previous request was not completed, + * nothing to return + */ + return NULL; + } else if (err == MMC_BLK_NOMEDIUM && areq) { + struct mmc_context_info *ctnx = &host->context_info; + /* + * If crad is removed, + * then we didn't wait for data completed. + * Assume that data-recieve done. + */ + ctnx->is_done_rcv = true; + wake_up_interruptible(&ctnx->wait); + } /* * Check BKOPS urgency for each R1 response */ -- 1.7.5.4 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: fix the aysync mechanism when card removed 2013-01-22 12:18 [PATCH] mmc: core: fix the aysync mechanism when card removed Jaehoon Chung @ 2013-01-31 7:06 ` Jaehoon Chung 2013-01-31 8:42 ` Subhash Jadavani 1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Jaehoon Chung @ 2013-01-31 7:06 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jaehoon Chung Cc: linux-mmc, Chris Ball, Konstantin Dorfman, Kyungmin Park, Per FORLIN, Maya Erez Have any other opinion? On 01/22/2013 09:18 PM, Jaehoon Chung wrote: > When card removed, then didn't complete the previously data. > (It didn't wakeup any interrupt.) > If card is removed, then we can assume to complete the previously data. > And wakeup the interrupt for wait_event of data. > > This problem is produced when sd-card is removed.(Sd-card is running some operation) > > Signed-off-by: Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@samsung.com> > Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <Kyungmin.park@samsung.com> > --- > drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++----------- > 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c > index 8b3a122..bc1d627 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c > @@ -515,17 +515,26 @@ struct mmc_async_req *mmc_start_req(struct mmc_host *host, > mmc_pre_req(host, areq->mrq, !host->areq); > > if (host->areq) { > - err = mmc_wait_for_data_req_done(host, host->areq->mrq, > - areq); > - if (err == MMC_BLK_NEW_REQUEST) { > - if (error) > - *error = err; > - /* > - * The previous request was not completed, > - * nothing to return > - */ > - return NULL; > - } > + err = mmc_wait_for_data_req_done(host, host->areq->mrq, > + areq); > + if (err == MMC_BLK_NEW_REQUEST) { > + if (error) > + *error = err; > + /* > + * The previous request was not completed, > + * nothing to return > + */ > + return NULL; > + } else if (err == MMC_BLK_NOMEDIUM && areq) { > + struct mmc_context_info *ctnx = &host->context_info; > + /* > + * If crad is removed, > + * then we didn't wait for data completed. > + * Assume that data-recieve done. > + */ > + ctnx->is_done_rcv = true; > + wake_up_interruptible(&ctnx->wait); > + } > /* > * Check BKOPS urgency for each R1 response > */ > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: fix the aysync mechanism when card removed 2013-01-22 12:18 [PATCH] mmc: core: fix the aysync mechanism when card removed Jaehoon Chung 2013-01-31 7:06 ` Jaehoon Chung @ 2013-01-31 8:42 ` Subhash Jadavani 2013-01-31 9:46 ` Jaehoon Chung 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Subhash Jadavani @ 2013-01-31 8:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Jaehoon Chung Cc: linux-mmc, Chris Ball, Konstantin Dorfman, Kyungmin Park, Per FORLIN, Maya Erez On 1/22/2013 5:48 PM, Jaehoon Chung wrote: > When card removed, then didn't complete the previously data. > (It didn't wakeup any interrupt.) > If card is removed, then we can assume to complete the previously data. > And wakeup the interrupt for wait_event of data. > > This problem is produced when sd-card is removed.(Sd-card is running some operation) > > Signed-off-by: Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@samsung.com> > Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <Kyungmin.park@samsung.com> > --- > drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++----------- > 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c > index 8b3a122..bc1d627 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c > @@ -515,17 +515,26 @@ struct mmc_async_req *mmc_start_req(struct mmc_host *host, > mmc_pre_req(host, areq->mrq, !host->areq); > > if (host->areq) { > - err = mmc_wait_for_data_req_done(host, host->areq->mrq, > - areq); > - if (err == MMC_BLK_NEW_REQUEST) { > - if (error) > - *error = err; > - /* > - * The previous request was not completed, > - * nothing to return > - */ > - return NULL; > - } > + err = mmc_wait_for_data_req_done(host, host->areq->mrq, > + areq); > + if (err == MMC_BLK_NEW_REQUEST) { > + if (error) > + *error = err; > + /* > + * The previous request was not completed, > + * nothing to return > + */ > + return NULL; > + } else if (err == MMC_BLK_NOMEDIUM && areq) { > + struct mmc_context_info *ctnx = &host->context_info; > + /* > + * If crad is removed, > + * then we didn't wait for data completed. > + * Assume that data-recieve done. > + */ > + ctnx->is_done_rcv = true; > + wake_up_interruptible(&ctnx->wait); Can you please explain more on what exactly we are trying to do here (may be you can list down the call flow)? I am not sure if i understood this correctly. But why would you need to wakeup the thread here? We are here because thread is already woken up. mmc_wait_for_data_req_done() would return only if either the new request is received or the currently running request on controller is completed. Regards, Subhash > + } > /* > * Check BKOPS urgency for each R1 response > */ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: fix the aysync mechanism when card removed 2013-01-31 8:42 ` Subhash Jadavani @ 2013-01-31 9:46 ` Jaehoon Chung 2013-01-31 10:48 ` Seungwon Jeon 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Jaehoon Chung @ 2013-01-31 9:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Subhash Jadavani Cc: Jaehoon Chung, linux-mmc, Chris Ball, Konstantin Dorfman, Kyungmin Park, Per FORLIN, Maya Erez On 01/31/2013 05:42 PM, Subhash Jadavani wrote: > On 1/22/2013 5:48 PM, Jaehoon Chung wrote: >> When card removed, then didn't complete the previously data. >> (It didn't wakeup any interrupt.) >> If card is removed, then we can assume to complete the previously data. >> And wakeup the interrupt for wait_event of data. >> >> This problem is produced when sd-card is removed.(Sd-card is running some operation) >> >> Signed-off-by: Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@samsung.com> >> Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <Kyungmin.park@samsung.com> >> --- >> drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++----------- >> 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c >> index 8b3a122..bc1d627 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c >> @@ -515,17 +515,26 @@ struct mmc_async_req *mmc_start_req(struct mmc_host *host, >> mmc_pre_req(host, areq->mrq, !host->areq); >> if (host->areq) { >> - err = mmc_wait_for_data_req_done(host, host->areq->mrq, >> - areq); >> - if (err == MMC_BLK_NEW_REQUEST) { >> - if (error) >> - *error = err; >> - /* >> - * The previous request was not completed, >> - * nothing to return >> - */ >> - return NULL; >> - } >> + err = mmc_wait_for_data_req_done(host, host->areq->mrq, >> + areq); >> + if (err == MMC_BLK_NEW_REQUEST) { >> + if (error) >> + *error = err; >> + /* >> + * The previous request was not completed, >> + * nothing to return >> + */ >> + return NULL; >> + } else if (err == MMC_BLK_NOMEDIUM && areq) { >> + struct mmc_context_info *ctnx = &host->context_info; >> + /* >> + * If crad is removed, >> + * then we didn't wait for data completed. >> + * Assume that data-recieve done. >> + */ >> + ctnx->is_done_rcv = true; >> + wake_up_interruptible(&ctnx->wait); > > Can you please explain more on what exactly we are trying to do here (may be you can list down the call flow)? I am not sure if i understood this correctly. But why would you need to wakeup the thread here? We are here because thread is already woken up. mmc_wait_for_data_req_done() would return only if either the new request is received or the currently running request on controller is completed. This problem is produced when card is removed and running some operation. If card is removed, mmc_wait_for_data_req_done() is returned error, right? But if there was async request and running async operation, then maybe run mmc_start_request() with areq. controller is waiting "_for_req_data_done_" for areq. If request is host->areq.process is running at this time. But if request is areq(prepared request), then mmc_wait_for_data_req_done should be pending. and system is dead-lock. Best Regards, Jaehoon Chung > > Regards, > Subhash > >> + } >> /* >> * Check BKOPS urgency for each R1 response >> */ > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] mmc: core: fix the aysync mechanism when card removed 2013-01-31 9:46 ` Jaehoon Chung @ 2013-01-31 10:48 ` Seungwon Jeon 2013-01-31 11:03 ` Jaehoon Chung 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Seungwon Jeon @ 2013-01-31 10:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Jaehoon Chung', 'Subhash Jadavani' Cc: 'linux-mmc', 'Chris Ball', 'Konstantin Dorfman', 'Kyungmin Park', 'Per FORLIN', 'Maya Erez' On Thursday, January 31, 2013, Jaehoon Chung wrote: > On 01/31/2013 05:42 PM, Subhash Jadavani wrote: > > On 1/22/2013 5:48 PM, Jaehoon Chung wrote: > >> When card removed, then didn't complete the previously data. > >> (It didn't wakeup any interrupt.) > >> If card is removed, then we can assume to complete the previously data. > >> And wakeup the interrupt for wait_event of data. > >> > >> This problem is produced when sd-card is removed.(Sd-card is running some operation) > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@samsung.com> > >> Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <Kyungmin.park@samsung.com> > >> --- > >> drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++----------- > >> 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c > >> index 8b3a122..bc1d627 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c > >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c > >> @@ -515,17 +515,26 @@ struct mmc_async_req *mmc_start_req(struct mmc_host *host, > >> mmc_pre_req(host, areq->mrq, !host->areq); > >> if (host->areq) { > >> - err = mmc_wait_for_data_req_done(host, host->areq->mrq, > >> - areq); > >> - if (err == MMC_BLK_NEW_REQUEST) { > >> - if (error) > >> - *error = err; > >> - /* > >> - * The previous request was not completed, > >> - * nothing to return > >> - */ > >> - return NULL; > >> - } > >> + err = mmc_wait_for_data_req_done(host, host->areq->mrq, > >> + areq); > >> + if (err == MMC_BLK_NEW_REQUEST) { > >> + if (error) > >> + *error = err; > >> + /* > >> + * The previous request was not completed, > >> + * nothing to return > >> + */ > >> + return NULL; > >> + } else if (err == MMC_BLK_NOMEDIUM && areq) { > >> + struct mmc_context_info *ctnx = &host->context_info; > >> + /* > >> + * If crad is removed, > >> + * then we didn't wait for data completed. > >> + * Assume that data-recieve done. > >> + */ > >> + ctnx->is_done_rcv = true; > >> + wake_up_interruptible(&ctnx->wait); > > > > Can you please explain more on what exactly we are trying to do here (may be you can list down the > call flow)? I am not sure if i understood this correctly. But why would you need to wakeup the thread > here? We are here because thread is already woken up. mmc_wait_for_data_req_done() would return only > if either the new request is received or the currently running request on controller is completed. > This problem is produced when card is removed and running some operation. > If card is removed, mmc_wait_for_data_req_done() is returned error, right? > But if there was async request and running async operation, then maybe run mmc_start_request() with > areq. > controller is waiting "_for_req_data_done_" for areq. > > If request is host->areq.process is running at this time. > But if request is areq(prepared request), then mmc_wait_for_data_req_done should be pending. > and system is dead-lock. I also found this problem with sdcard. I think it can be solved easily. Did you see the following patch? [PATCH 1/2] mmc: core: fix permanent sleep of mmcqd during card removal We may just get the hint from __mmc_start_req function. Thanks, Seungwon Jeon > > Best Regards, > Jaehoon Chung > > > > > Regards, > > Subhash > > > >> + } > >> /* > >> * Check BKOPS urgency for each R1 response > >> */ > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: fix the aysync mechanism when card removed 2013-01-31 10:48 ` Seungwon Jeon @ 2013-01-31 11:03 ` Jaehoon Chung 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Jaehoon Chung @ 2013-01-31 11:03 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Seungwon Jeon Cc: 'Jaehoon Chung', 'Subhash Jadavani', 'linux-mmc', 'Chris Ball', 'Konstantin Dorfman', 'Kyungmin Park', 'Per FORLIN', 'Maya Erez' Hi Seungwon, I didn't see your patch "[PATCH 1/2] mmc: core: fix permanent sleep of mmcqd during card removal". But i found the patch. right..i think it's also same problem. Your patch is more generic..great. I will reply to your patch with my acked. Best Regards, Jaehoon Chung On 01/31/2013 07:48 PM, Seungwon Jeon wrote: > On Thursday, January 31, 2013, Jaehoon Chung wrote: >> On 01/31/2013 05:42 PM, Subhash Jadavani wrote: >>> On 1/22/2013 5:48 PM, Jaehoon Chung wrote: >>>> When card removed, then didn't complete the previously data. >>>> (It didn't wakeup any interrupt.) >>>> If card is removed, then we can assume to complete the previously data. >>>> And wakeup the interrupt for wait_event of data. >>>> >>>> This problem is produced when sd-card is removed.(Sd-card is running some operation) >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@samsung.com> >>>> Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <Kyungmin.park@samsung.com> >>>> --- >>>> drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++----------- >>>> 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c >>>> index 8b3a122..bc1d627 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c >>>> @@ -515,17 +515,26 @@ struct mmc_async_req *mmc_start_req(struct mmc_host *host, >>>> mmc_pre_req(host, areq->mrq, !host->areq); >>>> if (host->areq) { >>>> - err = mmc_wait_for_data_req_done(host, host->areq->mrq, >>>> - areq); >>>> - if (err == MMC_BLK_NEW_REQUEST) { >>>> - if (error) >>>> - *error = err; >>>> - /* >>>> - * The previous request was not completed, >>>> - * nothing to return >>>> - */ >>>> - return NULL; >>>> - } >>>> + err = mmc_wait_for_data_req_done(host, host->areq->mrq, >>>> + areq); >>>> + if (err == MMC_BLK_NEW_REQUEST) { >>>> + if (error) >>>> + *error = err; >>>> + /* >>>> + * The previous request was not completed, >>>> + * nothing to return >>>> + */ >>>> + return NULL; >>>> + } else if (err == MMC_BLK_NOMEDIUM && areq) { >>>> + struct mmc_context_info *ctnx = &host->context_info; >>>> + /* >>>> + * If crad is removed, >>>> + * then we didn't wait for data completed. >>>> + * Assume that data-recieve done. >>>> + */ >>>> + ctnx->is_done_rcv = true; >>>> + wake_up_interruptible(&ctnx->wait); >>> >>> Can you please explain more on what exactly we are trying to do here (may be you can list down the >> call flow)? I am not sure if i understood this correctly. But why would you need to wakeup the thread >> here? We are here because thread is already woken up. mmc_wait_for_data_req_done() would return only >> if either the new request is received or the currently running request on controller is completed. >> This problem is produced when card is removed and running some operation. >> If card is removed, mmc_wait_for_data_req_done() is returned error, right? >> But if there was async request and running async operation, then maybe run mmc_start_request() with >> areq. >> controller is waiting "_for_req_data_done_" for areq. >> >> If request is host->areq.process is running at this time. >> But if request is areq(prepared request), then mmc_wait_for_data_req_done should be pending. >> and system is dead-lock. > I also found this problem with sdcard. > I think it can be solved easily. Did you see the following patch? > [PATCH 1/2] mmc: core: fix permanent sleep of mmcqd during card removal > We may just get the hint from __mmc_start_req function. > > Thanks, > Seungwon Jeon >> >> Best Regards, >> Jaehoon Chung >> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Subhash >>> >>>> + } >>>> /* >>>> * Check BKOPS urgency for each R1 response >>>> */ >>> >>> -- >>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in >>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >>> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in >> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-01-31 11:04 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2013-01-22 12:18 [PATCH] mmc: core: fix the aysync mechanism when card removed Jaehoon Chung 2013-01-31 7:06 ` Jaehoon Chung 2013-01-31 8:42 ` Subhash Jadavani 2013-01-31 9:46 ` Jaehoon Chung 2013-01-31 10:48 ` Seungwon Jeon 2013-01-31 11:03 ` Jaehoon Chung
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).