* [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
@ 2007-03-07 7:44 Kyungmin Park
2007-03-08 6:06 ` Kyungmin Park
2007-03-09 3:31 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Kyungmin Park @ 2007-03-07 7:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-omap-open-source
Hi
Here's performance results of MMC on OMAP2.
After patch we can good read performances on MoviNAND
Idea's from N800 code.
% Test Environment
Target: Apollon
Kernel: 2.6.21-rc2-omap1 (latest: 07.03.07)
Filesystem: VFAT
# iozone -A -s 10m -U /mmc -f /mmc/test -e
* Before
% MMC (64MB)
KB reclen write rewrite read reread
10240 4 2418 2463 6393 6362
10240 8 2391 2463 6362 6393
10240 16 2396 2463 6362 6362
10240 32 2348 2418 6393 6393
10240 64 2365 2404 6331 6331
10240 128 2365 2409 6040 6040
10240 256 2348 2413 6068 6040
% MoviNAND (4GB)
KB reclen write rewrite read reread
10240 4 2328 2206 6619 6687
10240 8 2332 2206 6687 6687
10240 16 2332 2206 6687 6687
10240 32 2323 2336 6721 6721
10240 64 2177 2323 6553 6553
10240 128 2177 2319 6393 6362
10240 256 2180 2323 6362 6393
* After patch
mmc0: selected 48.000MHz transfer rate
mmc0: clock 48000000Hz busmode 2 powermode 2 cs 0 Vdd 20 width 2
% MMC (64MB) (Note: The result is similar since current MMC card supports
only 24MHz.)
KB reclen write rewrite read reread
10240 4 2501 2585 6425 6456
10240 8 2418 2520 6393 6425
10240 16 2409 2487 6393 6425
10240 32 2391 2473 6425 6425
10240 64 2391 2463 6331 6362
10240 128 2383 2427 6068 6068
10240 256 2391 2422 6096 6096
% MoviNAND (4GB)
KB reclen write rewrite read reread
10240 4 3034 2605 7201 8856
10240 8 2616 2468 9039 8916
10240 16 2600 2642 9102 8916
10240 32 2422 2600 8977 8916
10240 64 2409 2580 8977 8738
10240 128 2404 2580 8456 8456
10240 256 2409 2585 8402 8456
The interesting thing is why N800 mmc is too slow?
* target: N800
Same test program
Original
KB reclen write rewrite read reread
10240 4 341 338 1418 1425
10240 8 343 343 1420 1427
10240 16 342 342 1416 1426
10240 32 341 345 1419 1427
10240 64 342 345 1416 1427
10240 128 342 343 1375 1385
10240 256 344 345 1378 1381
After HS-MMC and multiblock write enable
KB reclen write rewrite read reread
10240 4 1896 1848 2765 2774
10240 8 1971 2004 2789 2781
10240 16 1970 2002 2757 2779
10240 32 1844 1874 2760 2791
10240 64 1896 1924 2747 2789
10240 128 1902 1929 2607 2635
10240 256 1896 1945 2628 2631
Thank you,
Kyungmin Park
ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
- set max frequency 48000000 on OMAP2
- Add CONFIG_MMC_DEBUG
Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>
--
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/omap.c b/drivers/mmc/omap.c
index e72a7e8..93ec7fa 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/omap.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/omap.c
@@ -415,6 +415,7 @@ mmc_omap_xfer_data(struct mmc_omap_host *host, int
write)
}
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_MMC_DEBUG
static inline void mmc_omap_report_irq(u16 status)
{
static const char *mmc_omap_status_bits[] = {
@@ -431,6 +432,7 @@ static inline void mmc_omap_report_irq(u16 status)
c++;
}
}
+#endif
static irqreturn_t mmc_omap_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
{
@@ -1096,7 +1098,10 @@ static int __init mmc_omap_probe(struct
platform_device *pdev)
mmc->ops = &mmc_omap_ops;
mmc->f_min = 400000;
- mmc->f_max = 24000000;
+ if (cpu_class_is_omap2())
+ mmc->f_max = 48000000;
+ else
+ mmc->f_max = 24000000;
mmc->ocr_avail = MMC_VDD_32_33 | MMC_VDD_33_34;
mmc->caps = MMC_CAP_MULTIWRITE | MMC_CAP_BYTEBLOCK;
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
2007-03-07 7:44 [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2 Kyungmin Park
@ 2007-03-08 6:06 ` Kyungmin Park
[not found] ` <45EFA96D.9010604@drzeus.cx>
2007-03-09 3:31 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Kyungmin Park @ 2007-03-08 6:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-omap-open-source, drzeus
Updated patch for recent MMC changes
- set max frequency 48000000 on OMAP2
- set HIGHSPEED feature for omap host
- add CONFIG_MMC_DEBUG
Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>
--
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/omap.c b/drivers/mmc/omap.c
index e72a7e8..daf73e0 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/omap.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/omap.c
@@ -415,6 +415,7 @@ mmc_omap_xfer_data(struct mmc_omap_host *host, int
write)
}
}
+#ifdef CONFIG_MMC_DEBUG
static inline void mmc_omap_report_irq(u16 status)
{
static const char *mmc_omap_status_bits[] = {
@@ -431,6 +432,7 @@ static inline void mmc_omap_report_irq(u16 status)
c++;
}
}
+#endif
static irqreturn_t mmc_omap_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
{
@@ -1096,9 +1098,13 @@ static int __init mmc_omap_probe(struct
platform_device *pdev)
mmc->ops = &mmc_omap_ops;
mmc->f_min = 400000;
- mmc->f_max = 24000000;
+ if (cpu_class_is_omap2())
+ mmc->f_max = 48000000;
+ else
+ mmc->f_max = 24000000;
mmc->ocr_avail = MMC_VDD_32_33 | MMC_VDD_33_34;
- mmc->caps = MMC_CAP_MULTIWRITE | MMC_CAP_BYTEBLOCK;
+ mmc->caps = MMC_CAP_MULTIWRITE | MMC_CAP_BYTEBLOCK |
+ MMC_CAP_MMC_HIGHSPEED | MMC_CAP_SD_HIGHSPEED;
if (minfo->wire4)
mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_4_BIT_DATA;
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
[not found] ` <45EFA96D.9010604@drzeus.cx>
@ 2007-03-08 7:28 ` Kyungmin Park
2007-03-08 12:02 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Kyungmin Park @ 2007-03-08 7:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Pierre Ossman'; +Cc: linux-omap-open-source
> Do _not_ take these flags lightly. If you enable them when
> the hardware doesn't support the alternative timing, you have
> a good chance of cards not working. So to me this looks very
> wrong as the pre-48MHz controllers probably only follow the
> legacy timing requirements.
>
I'm not sure OMAP2 MMC supports highspeed feature. I can't find anytings in
OMAP2 TRM.
if (cpu_class_is_omap2())
mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_MMC_HIGHSPEED | MMC_CAP_SD_HIGHSPEED;
mmc0: selected 48.000MHz transfer rate
mmc0: clock 48000000Hz busmode 2 powermode 2 cs 0 Vdd 20 width 2 timing 1
Then is it dependent on platform?
if (minfo->highspeed)
mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_MMC_HIGHSPEED | MMC_CAP_SD_HIGHSPEED;
And even though we set HIGHSPEED, the card set their clock correctly. Is it
right?
mmc0: selected 26.000MHz transfer rate
mmc0: clock 26000000Hz busmode 2 powermode 2 cs 0 Vdd 20 width 2 timing 1
Thank you,
Kyungmin Park
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
2007-03-08 7:28 ` Kyungmin Park
@ 2007-03-08 12:02 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
[not found] ` <45F00C93.2000305@drzeus.cx>
2007-03-09 2:41 ` Kyungmin Park
0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Syed Mohammed, Khasim @ 2007-03-08 12:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kmpark, Pierre Ossman; +Cc: linux-omap-open-source
Hi Kyungmin,
OMAP2420 doesn't support High Speed. OMAP2430 does support Highspeed.
Please see our code for 2430 (its on linux.omap.com).
Regards,
Khasim
________________________________
From: linux-omap-open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com on behalf of Kyungmin Park
Sent: Thu 3/8/2007 1:28 AM
To: 'Pierre Ossman'
Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
> Do _not_ take these flags lightly. If you enable them when
> the hardware doesn't support the alternative timing, you have
> a good chance of cards not working. So to me this looks very
> wrong as the pre-48MHz controllers probably only follow the
> legacy timing requirements.
>
I'm not sure OMAP2 MMC supports highspeed feature. I can't find anytings in
OMAP2 TRM.
if (cpu_class_is_omap2())
mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_MMC_HIGHSPEED | MMC_CAP_SD_HIGHSPEED;
mmc0: selected 48.000MHz transfer rate
mmc0: clock 48000000Hz busmode 2 powermode 2 cs 0 Vdd 20 width 2 timing 1
Then is it dependent on platform?
if (minfo->highspeed)
mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_MMC_HIGHSPEED | MMC_CAP_SD_HIGHSPEED;
And even though we set HIGHSPEED, the card set their clock correctly. Is it
right?
mmc0: selected 26.000MHz transfer rate
mmc0: clock 26000000Hz busmode 2 powermode 2 cs 0 Vdd 20 width 2 timing 1
Thank you,
Kyungmin Park
_______________________________________________
Linux-omap-open-source mailing list
Linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
http://linux.omap.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-omap-open-source
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
[not found] ` <45F00C93.2000305@drzeus.cx>
@ 2007-03-08 13:16 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Syed Mohammed, Khasim @ 2007-03-08 13:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pierre Ossman; +Cc: linux-omap-open-source, kmpark
Hi Pierre,
I can't give specs, but I can definitely pass you required data. Will mail you later.
Regards,
Khasim
________________________________
From: Pierre Ossman [mailto:drzeus@drzeus.cx]
Sent: Thu 3/8/2007 7:16 AM
To: Syed Mohammed, Khasim
Cc: kmpark@infradead.org; linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
Syed Mohammed, Khasim wrote:
> Hi Kyungmin,
>
> OMAP2420 doesn't support High Speed. OMAP2430 does support Highspeed.
>
> Please see our code for 2430 (its on linux.omap.com).
>
Do you have some specs for the 2430 with timing info?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
2007-03-08 12:02 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
[not found] ` <45F00C93.2000305@drzeus.cx>
@ 2007-03-09 2:41 ` Kyungmin Park
2007-03-09 5:10 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Kyungmin Park @ 2007-03-09 2:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Syed Mohammed, Khasim', 'Pierre Ossman'
Cc: linux-omap-open-source
Hi Khasim,
I checked the mmc code in linux-2.6.14-omap2420-omap2430. It is used the
old samsung patch (mmcplus) in mmc core.
So if the the csd->mmca_vsn is CSD_SPEC_VER_4 then it always set highspeed.
the follwing code is always true if the chip is correct.
if ((ext_csd->card_type & MMCPLUS_26MHZ) || (ext_csd-
>card_type & MMCPLUS_52MHZ)) {
err = mmc_switch_hsmode(host, card);
if (err != MMC_ERR_NONE) {
mmc_card_set_dead(card);
continue;
}
}
then what makes the highspeed enabled? host or card?
If the host supports up to 48MHz clock and card supports the highspeed.
then what's the correct clock?
Currently if we don't set HIGHSPPED flags, it always set 20MHz as in the
Spec. Since it is calculated from card->csd.max_dtr in
mmc_calculate_clock().
list_for_each_entry(card, &host->cards, node)
if (!mmc_card_dead(card)) {
if (mmc_card_highspeed(card) && mmc_card_sd(card)) {
if (max_dtr > card->sw_caps.hs_max_dtr)
max_dtr = card->sw_caps.hs_max_dtr;
} else if (mmc_card_highspeed(card) &&
!mmc_card_sd(card)) {
if (max_dtr > card->ext_csd.hs_max_dtr)
max_dtr = card->ext_csd.hs_max_dtr;
} else if (max_dtr > card->csd.max_dtr) {
max_dtr = card->csd.max_dtr;
}
}
Okay I will check the MMC Spec.
Thank you,
Kyungmin Park
________________________________
From: Syed Mohammed, Khasim [mailto:x0khasim@ti.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 9:02 PM
To: kmpark@infradead.org; Pierre Ossman
Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
Hi Kyungmin,
OMAP2420 doesn't support High Speed. OMAP2430 does support
Highspeed.
Please see our code for 2430 (its on linux.omap.com).
Regards,
Khasim
________________________________
From: linux-omap-open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com on behalf of
Kyungmin Park
Sent: Thu 3/8/2007 1:28 AM
To: 'Pierre Ossman'
Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
> Do _not_ take these flags lightly. If you enable them when
> the hardware doesn't support the alternative timing, you have
> a good chance of cards not working. So to me this looks very
> wrong as the pre-48MHz controllers probably only follow the
> legacy timing requirements.
>
I'm not sure OMAP2 MMC supports highspeed feature. I can't find
anytings in
OMAP2 TRM.
if (cpu_class_is_omap2())
mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_MMC_HIGHSPEED |
MMC_CAP_SD_HIGHSPEED;
mmc0: selected 48.000MHz transfer rate
mmc0: clock 48000000Hz busmode 2 powermode 2 cs 0 Vdd 20 width 2
timing 1
Then is it dependent on platform?
if (minfo->highspeed)
mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_MMC_HIGHSPEED |
MMC_CAP_SD_HIGHSPEED;
And even though we set HIGHSPEED, the card set their clock
correctly. Is it
right?
mmc0: selected 26.000MHz transfer rate
mmc0: clock 26000000Hz busmode 2 powermode 2 cs 0 Vdd 20 width 2
timing 1
Thank you,
Kyungmin Park
_______________________________________________
Linux-omap-open-source mailing list
Linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
http://linux.omap.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-omap-open-source
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
2007-03-07 7:44 [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2 Kyungmin Park
2007-03-08 6:06 ` Kyungmin Park
@ 2007-03-09 3:31 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
2007-03-29 20:13 ` Tony Lindgren
1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Syed Mohammed, Khasim @ 2007-03-09 3:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kmpark, linux-omap-open-source
Hi Kyungmin,
For OMAP2420 there are few MMC erratas,
1. If MMC controller is configured for 4bit and if MMC CLK frequency is
over 24Mhz it has as a diminishing impact on throughput. Hence, it is
not recommended to use a clock over 24MHz for MMC 4 bits mode.
2. If an external transceiver with a round trip delay clock greater than
7ns is used then external clock to control the MMC card is limited to
24MHz.
So, though OMAP 2420 MMC Controller is MMC 4.0 spec compliant and
supports clk upto 48Mhz we were not able achieve high data rate (as we
should be for a HSMMC).
Hope this helps for your analysis.
Regards,
Khasim
>-----Original Message-----
>From: linux-omap-open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com [mailto:linux-omap-
>open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com] On Behalf Of Kyungmin Park
>Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 1:44 AM
>To: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>Subject: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
>
>Hi
>
>Here's performance results of MMC on OMAP2.
>After patch we can good read performances on MoviNAND
>Idea's from N800 code.
>
>% Test Environment
>Target: Apollon
>Kernel: 2.6.21-rc2-omap1 (latest: 07.03.07)
>Filesystem: VFAT
>
># iozone -A -s 10m -U /mmc -f /mmc/test -e
>
>* Before
>% MMC (64MB)
> KB reclen write rewrite read reread
> 10240 4 2418 2463 6393 6362
> 10240 8 2391 2463 6362 6393
> 10240 16 2396 2463 6362 6362
> 10240 32 2348 2418 6393 6393
> 10240 64 2365 2404 6331 6331
> 10240 128 2365 2409 6040 6040
> 10240 256 2348 2413 6068 6040
>
>% MoviNAND (4GB)
> KB reclen write rewrite read reread
> 10240 4 2328 2206 6619 6687
> 10240 8 2332 2206 6687 6687
> 10240 16 2332 2206 6687 6687
> 10240 32 2323 2336 6721 6721
> 10240 64 2177 2323 6553 6553
> 10240 128 2177 2319 6393 6362
> 10240 256 2180 2323 6362 6393
>
>* After patch
>mmc0: selected 48.000MHz transfer rate
>mmc0: clock 48000000Hz busmode 2 powermode 2 cs 0 Vdd 20 width 2
>% MMC (64MB) (Note: The result is similar since current MMC card
supports
>only 24MHz.)
>
> KB reclen write rewrite read reread
> 10240 4 2501 2585 6425 6456
> 10240 8 2418 2520 6393 6425
> 10240 16 2409 2487 6393 6425
> 10240 32 2391 2473 6425 6425
> 10240 64 2391 2463 6331 6362
> 10240 128 2383 2427 6068 6068
> 10240 256 2391 2422 6096 6096
>
>% MoviNAND (4GB)
> KB reclen write rewrite read reread
> 10240 4 3034 2605 7201 8856
> 10240 8 2616 2468 9039 8916
> 10240 16 2600 2642 9102 8916
> 10240 32 2422 2600 8977 8916
> 10240 64 2409 2580 8977 8738
> 10240 128 2404 2580 8456 8456
> 10240 256 2409 2585 8402 8456
>
>The interesting thing is why N800 mmc is too slow?
>
>* target: N800
>Same test program
>
>Original
> KB reclen write rewrite read reread
> 10240 4 341 338 1418 1425
> 10240 8 343 343 1420 1427
> 10240 16 342 342 1416 1426
> 10240 32 341 345 1419 1427
> 10240 64 342 345 1416 1427
> 10240 128 342 343 1375 1385
> 10240 256 344 345 1378 1381
>
>After HS-MMC and multiblock write enable
>
> KB reclen write rewrite read reread
> 10240 4 1896 1848 2765 2774
> 10240 8 1971 2004 2789 2781
> 10240 16 1970 2002 2757 2779
> 10240 32 1844 1874 2760 2791
> 10240 64 1896 1924 2747 2789
> 10240 128 1902 1929 2607 2635
> 10240 256 1896 1945 2628 2631
>
>Thank you,
>Kyungmin Park
>
>ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
>
>- set max frequency 48000000 on OMAP2
>- Add CONFIG_MMC_DEBUG
>
>Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@samsung.com>
>--
>
>diff --git a/drivers/mmc/omap.c b/drivers/mmc/omap.c
>index e72a7e8..93ec7fa 100644
>--- a/drivers/mmc/omap.c
>+++ b/drivers/mmc/omap.c
>@@ -415,6 +415,7 @@ mmc_omap_xfer_data(struct mmc_omap_host *host, int
>write)
> }
> }
>
>+#ifdef CONFIG_MMC_DEBUG
> static inline void mmc_omap_report_irq(u16 status)
> {
> static const char *mmc_omap_status_bits[] = {
>@@ -431,6 +432,7 @@ static inline void mmc_omap_report_irq(u16 status)
> c++;
> }
> }
>+#endif
>
> static irqreturn_t mmc_omap_irq(int irq, void *dev_id)
> {
>@@ -1096,7 +1098,10 @@ static int __init mmc_omap_probe(struct
>platform_device *pdev)
>
> mmc->ops = &mmc_omap_ops;
> mmc->f_min = 400000;
>- mmc->f_max = 24000000;
>+ if (cpu_class_is_omap2())
>+ mmc->f_max = 48000000;
>+ else
>+ mmc->f_max = 24000000;
> mmc->ocr_avail = MMC_VDD_32_33 | MMC_VDD_33_34;
> mmc->caps = MMC_CAP_MULTIWRITE | MMC_CAP_BYTEBLOCK;
>
>_______________________________________________
>Linux-omap-open-source mailing list
>Linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>http://linux.omap.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-omap-open-source
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
2007-03-09 2:41 ` Kyungmin Park
@ 2007-03-09 5:10 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
2007-03-09 5:18 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Syed Mohammed, Khasim @ 2007-03-09 5:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kmpark, Pierre Ossman; +Cc: linux-omap-open-source
Hi Kyungmin,
I haven't gone through the entire code as such, here is my
understanding.
>So if the the csd->mmca_vsn is CSD_SPEC_VER_4 then it always set
highspeed.
Yes, if card is 4.0 compliant then it's HS Card.
>then what makes the highspeed enabled? host or card?
Both - right? First controller should support such clock rates, and card
should be 4.0 (or more) compliant.
>If the host supports up to 48MHz clock and card supports the highspeed.
>then what's the correct clock?
If controller supports upto 48Mhz then I think we can only support 26Mhz
max. There are some special bits in 2430 processor to support 52 Mhz
According to spec, a card can support both 52 & 26 or 26 (0x1 or 0x3).
So, if our controller doesn't support 52Mhz clock rates then we should
stick to 26Mhz.
Regards,
Khasim
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Kyungmin Park [mailto:kmpark@infradead.org]
>Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 8:42 PM
>To: Syed Mohammed, Khasim; 'Pierre Ossman'
>Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
>
>Hi Khasim,
>
>I checked the mmc code in linux-2.6.14-omap2420-omap2430. It is used
the
>old samsung patch (mmcplus) in mmc core.
>So if the the csd->mmca_vsn is CSD_SPEC_VER_4 then it always set
highspeed.
>the follwing code is always true if the chip is correct.
>
> if ((ext_csd->card_type & MMCPLUS_26MHZ) || (ext_csd-
>>card_type & MMCPLUS_52MHZ)) {
> err = mmc_switch_hsmode(host, card);
> if (err != MMC_ERR_NONE) {
> mmc_card_set_dead(card);
> continue;
> }
> }
>
>then what makes the highspeed enabled? host or card?
>If the host supports up to 48MHz clock and card supports the highspeed.
>then what's the correct clock?
>
>Currently if we don't set HIGHSPPED flags, it always set 20MHz as in
the
>Spec. Since it is calculated from card->csd.max_dtr in
>mmc_calculate_clock().
>
> list_for_each_entry(card, &host->cards, node)
> if (!mmc_card_dead(card)) {
> if (mmc_card_highspeed(card) &&
mmc_card_sd(card))
>{
> if (max_dtr > card->sw_caps.hs_max_dtr)
> max_dtr =
card->sw_caps.hs_max_dtr;
> } else if (mmc_card_highspeed(card) &&
>!mmc_card_sd(card)) {
> if (max_dtr > card->ext_csd.hs_max_dtr)
> max_dtr =
card->ext_csd.hs_max_dtr;
> } else if (max_dtr > card->csd.max_dtr) {
> max_dtr = card->csd.max_dtr;
> }
> }
>
>Okay I will check the MMC Spec.
>
>Thank you,
>Kyungmin Park
>
>
>________________________________
>
> From: Syed Mohammed, Khasim [mailto:x0khasim@ti.com]
> Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 9:02 PM
> To: kmpark@infradead.org; Pierre Ossman
> Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
>
>
> Hi Kyungmin,
>
> OMAP2420 doesn't support High Speed. OMAP2430 does support
>Highspeed.
>
> Please see our code for 2430 (its on linux.omap.com).
>
> Regards,
> Khasim
>
>________________________________
>
> From: linux-omap-open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com on behalf of
>Kyungmin Park
> Sent: Thu 3/8/2007 1:28 AM
> To: 'Pierre Ossman'
> Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
>
>
>
>
> > Do _not_ take these flags lightly. If you enable them when
> > the hardware doesn't support the alternative timing, you have
> > a good chance of cards not working. So to me this looks very
> > wrong as the pre-48MHz controllers probably only follow the
> > legacy timing requirements.
> >
>
> I'm not sure OMAP2 MMC supports highspeed feature. I can't find
>anytings in
> OMAP2 TRM.
>
> if (cpu_class_is_omap2())
> mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_MMC_HIGHSPEED |
>MMC_CAP_SD_HIGHSPEED;
>
> mmc0: selected 48.000MHz transfer rate
> mmc0: clock 48000000Hz busmode 2 powermode 2 cs 0 Vdd 20 width 2
>timing 1
>
> Then is it dependent on platform?
>
> if (minfo->highspeed)
> mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_MMC_HIGHSPEED |
>MMC_CAP_SD_HIGHSPEED;
>
> And even though we set HIGHSPEED, the card set their clock
>correctly. Is it
> right?
>
> mmc0: selected 26.000MHz transfer rate
> mmc0: clock 26000000Hz busmode 2 powermode 2 cs 0 Vdd 20 width 2
>timing 1
>
> Thank you,
> Kyungmin Park
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-omap-open-source mailing list
> Linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
> http://linux.omap.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-omap-open-source
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
2007-03-09 5:10 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
@ 2007-03-09 5:18 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
2007-03-09 5:59 ` Kyungmin Park
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Syed Mohammed, Khasim @ 2007-03-09 5:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Syed Mohammed, Khasim, kmpark, Pierre Ossman; +Cc: linux-omap-open-source
Sorry, small correction. It can support from 0 to 26 Mhz or 0 to 52 Mhz
We should be able to configure 48Mhz.
Regards,
Khasim
>-----Original Message-----
>From: linux-omap-open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com [mailto:linux-omap-
>open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com] On Behalf Of Syed Mohammed, Khasim
>Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 11:11 PM
>To: kmpark@infradead.org; Pierre Ossman
>Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
>
>Hi Kyungmin,
>
>I haven't gone through the entire code as such, here is my
>understanding.
>
>>So if the the csd->mmca_vsn is CSD_SPEC_VER_4 then it always set
>highspeed.
>Yes, if card is 4.0 compliant then it's HS Card.
>
>>then what makes the highspeed enabled? host or card?
>Both - right? First controller should support such clock rates, and
card
>should be 4.0 (or more) compliant.
>
>>If the host supports up to 48MHz clock and card supports the
highspeed.
>>then what's the correct clock?
>If controller supports upto 48Mhz then I think we can only support
26Mhz
>max. There are some special bits in 2430 processor to support 52 Mhz
>
>According to spec, a card can support both 52 & 26 or 26 (0x1 or 0x3).
>So, if our controller doesn't support 52Mhz clock rates then we should
>stick to 26Mhz.
>
>Regards,
>Khasim
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Kyungmin Park [mailto:kmpark@infradead.org]
>>Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 8:42 PM
>>To: Syed Mohammed, Khasim; 'Pierre Ossman'
>>Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>>Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
>>
>>Hi Khasim,
>>
>>I checked the mmc code in linux-2.6.14-omap2420-omap2430. It is used
>the
>>old samsung patch (mmcplus) in mmc core.
>>So if the the csd->mmca_vsn is CSD_SPEC_VER_4 then it always set
>highspeed.
>>the follwing code is always true if the chip is correct.
>>
>> if ((ext_csd->card_type & MMCPLUS_26MHZ) || (ext_csd-
>>>card_type & MMCPLUS_52MHZ)) {
>> err = mmc_switch_hsmode(host, card);
>> if (err != MMC_ERR_NONE) {
>> mmc_card_set_dead(card);
>> continue;
>> }
>> }
>>
>>then what makes the highspeed enabled? host or card?
>>If the host supports up to 48MHz clock and card supports the
highspeed.
>>then what's the correct clock?
>>
>>Currently if we don't set HIGHSPPED flags, it always set 20MHz as in
>the
>>Spec. Since it is calculated from card->csd.max_dtr in
>>mmc_calculate_clock().
>>
>> list_for_each_entry(card, &host->cards, node)
>> if (!mmc_card_dead(card)) {
>> if (mmc_card_highspeed(card) &&
>mmc_card_sd(card))
>>{
>> if (max_dtr >
card->sw_caps.hs_max_dtr)
>> max_dtr =
>card->sw_caps.hs_max_dtr;
>> } else if (mmc_card_highspeed(card) &&
>>!mmc_card_sd(card)) {
>> if (max_dtr >
card->ext_csd.hs_max_dtr)
>> max_dtr =
>card->ext_csd.hs_max_dtr;
>> } else if (max_dtr > card->csd.max_dtr) {
>> max_dtr = card->csd.max_dtr;
>> }
>> }
>>
>>Okay I will check the MMC Spec.
>>
>>Thank you,
>>Kyungmin Park
>>
>>
>>________________________________
>>
>> From: Syed Mohammed, Khasim [mailto:x0khasim@ti.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 9:02 PM
>> To: kmpark@infradead.org; Pierre Ossman
>> Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>> Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
>>
>>
>> Hi Kyungmin,
>>
>> OMAP2420 doesn't support High Speed. OMAP2430 does support
>>Highspeed.
>>
>> Please see our code for 2430 (its on linux.omap.com).
>>
>> Regards,
>> Khasim
>>
>>________________________________
>>
>> From: linux-omap-open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com on behalf of
>>Kyungmin Park
>> Sent: Thu 3/8/2007 1:28 AM
>> To: 'Pierre Ossman'
>> Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>> Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Do _not_ take these flags lightly. If you enable them when
>> > the hardware doesn't support the alternative timing, you have
>> > a good chance of cards not working. So to me this looks very
>> > wrong as the pre-48MHz controllers probably only follow the
>> > legacy timing requirements.
>> >
>>
>> I'm not sure OMAP2 MMC supports highspeed feature. I can't find
>>anytings in
>> OMAP2 TRM.
>>
>> if (cpu_class_is_omap2())
>> mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_MMC_HIGHSPEED |
>>MMC_CAP_SD_HIGHSPEED;
>>
>> mmc0: selected 48.000MHz transfer rate
>> mmc0: clock 48000000Hz busmode 2 powermode 2 cs 0 Vdd 20 width 2
>>timing 1
>>
>> Then is it dependent on platform?
>>
>> if (minfo->highspeed)
>> mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_MMC_HIGHSPEED |
>>MMC_CAP_SD_HIGHSPEED;
>>
>> And even though we set HIGHSPEED, the card set their clock
>>correctly. Is it
>> right?
>>
>> mmc0: selected 26.000MHz transfer rate
>> mmc0: clock 26000000Hz busmode 2 powermode 2 cs 0 Vdd 20 width 2
>>timing 1
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Kyungmin Park
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Linux-omap-open-source mailing list
>> Linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>> http://linux.omap.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-omap-open-source
>>
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Linux-omap-open-source mailing list
>Linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>http://linux.omap.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-omap-open-source
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
2007-03-09 5:18 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
@ 2007-03-09 5:59 ` Kyungmin Park
2007-03-09 6:16 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Kyungmin Park @ 2007-03-09 5:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Syed Mohammed, Khasim', 'Pierre Ossman'
Cc: linux-omap-open-source
Yes, that's my understanding.
If the card is 4.0 compliant and OMAP2 supports up to 48MHz. then we use
this 48MHz clock.
But current mmc code down-grade to 20MHz since it's not set highspeed.
If the card is 4.0 compliant and even though host don't support highspeed
feature, we set the highspeed flags for support host max clocks.
I think highspeed depends on host clock. Is it right?
Thank you,
Kyungmin Park
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Syed Mohammed, Khasim [mailto:x0khasim@ti.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 2:18 PM
> To: Syed Mohammed, Khasim; kmpark@infradead.org; Pierre Ossman
> Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
>
> Sorry, small correction. It can support from 0 to 26 Mhz or 0
> to 52 Mhz We should be able to configure 48Mhz.
>
> Regards,
> Khasim
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: linux-omap-open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com
> [mailto:linux-omap-
> >open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com] On Behalf Of Syed
> Mohammed, Khasim
> >Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 11:11 PM
> >To: kmpark@infradead.org; Pierre Ossman
> >Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
> >Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
> >
> >Hi Kyungmin,
> >
> >I haven't gone through the entire code as such, here is my
> >understanding.
> >
> >>So if the the csd->mmca_vsn is CSD_SPEC_VER_4 then it always set
> >highspeed.
> >Yes, if card is 4.0 compliant then it's HS Card.
> >
> >>then what makes the highspeed enabled? host or card?
> >Both - right? First controller should support such clock rates, and
> card
> >should be 4.0 (or more) compliant.
> >
> >>If the host supports up to 48MHz clock and card supports the
> highspeed.
> >>then what's the correct clock?
> >If controller supports upto 48Mhz then I think we can only support
> 26Mhz
> >max. There are some special bits in 2430 processor to support 52 Mhz
> >
> >According to spec, a card can support both 52 & 26 or 26
> (0x1 or 0x3).
> >So, if our controller doesn't support 52Mhz clock rates then
> we should
> >stick to 26Mhz.
> >
> >Regards,
> >Khasim
> >
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Kyungmin Park [mailto:kmpark@infradead.org]
> >>Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 8:42 PM
> >>To: Syed Mohammed, Khasim; 'Pierre Ossman'
> >>Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
> >>Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
> >>
> >>Hi Khasim,
> >>
> >>I checked the mmc code in linux-2.6.14-omap2420-omap2430. It is used
> >the
> >>old samsung patch (mmcplus) in mmc core.
> >>So if the the csd->mmca_vsn is CSD_SPEC_VER_4 then it always set
> >highspeed.
> >>the follwing code is always true if the chip is correct.
> >>
> >> if ((ext_csd->card_type & MMCPLUS_26MHZ) || (ext_csd-
> >>>card_type & MMCPLUS_52MHZ)) {
> >> err = mmc_switch_hsmode(host, card);
> >> if (err != MMC_ERR_NONE) {
> >> mmc_card_set_dead(card);
> >> continue;
> >> }
> >> }
> >>
> >>then what makes the highspeed enabled? host or card?
> >>If the host supports up to 48MHz clock and card supports the
> highspeed.
> >>then what's the correct clock?
> >>
> >>Currently if we don't set HIGHSPPED flags, it always set 20MHz as in
> >the
> >>Spec. Since it is calculated from card->csd.max_dtr in
> >>mmc_calculate_clock().
> >>
> >> list_for_each_entry(card, &host->cards, node)
> >> if (!mmc_card_dead(card)) {
> >> if (mmc_card_highspeed(card) &&
> >mmc_card_sd(card))
> >>{
> >> if (max_dtr >
> card->sw_caps.hs_max_dtr)
> >> max_dtr =
> >card->sw_caps.hs_max_dtr;
> >> } else if (mmc_card_highspeed(card) &&
> >>!mmc_card_sd(card)) {
> >> if (max_dtr >
> card->ext_csd.hs_max_dtr)
> >> max_dtr =
> >card->ext_csd.hs_max_dtr;
> >> } else if (max_dtr > card->csd.max_dtr) {
> >> max_dtr = card->csd.max_dtr;
> >> }
> >> }
> >>
> >>Okay I will check the MMC Spec.
> >>
> >>Thank you,
> >>Kyungmin Park
> >>
> >>
> >>________________________________
> >>
> >> From: Syed Mohammed, Khasim [mailto:x0khasim@ti.com]
> >> Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 9:02 PM
> >> To: kmpark@infradead.org; Pierre Ossman
> >> Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
> >> Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
> >>
> >>
> >> Hi Kyungmin,
> >>
> >> OMAP2420 doesn't support High Speed. OMAP2430 does
> support Highspeed.
> >>
> >> Please see our code for 2430 (its on linux.omap.com).
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >> Khasim
> >>
> >>________________________________
> >>
> >> From: linux-omap-open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com on
> behalf of
> >>Kyungmin Park
> >> Sent: Thu 3/8/2007 1:28 AM
> >> To: 'Pierre Ossman'
> >> Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
> >> Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > Do _not_ take these flags lightly. If you enable them when
> >> > the hardware doesn't support the alternative timing, you have
> >> > a good chance of cards not working. So to me this looks very
> >> > wrong as the pre-48MHz controllers probably only follow the
> >> > legacy timing requirements.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I'm not sure OMAP2 MMC supports highspeed feature. I can't find
> >>anytings in
> >> OMAP2 TRM.
> >>
> >> if (cpu_class_is_omap2())
> >> mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_MMC_HIGHSPEED |
> >>MMC_CAP_SD_HIGHSPEED;
> >>
> >> mmc0: selected 48.000MHz transfer rate
> >> mmc0: clock 48000000Hz busmode 2 powermode 2 cs 0 Vdd
> 20 width 2
> >>timing 1
> >>
> >> Then is it dependent on platform?
> >>
> >> if (minfo->highspeed)
> >> mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_MMC_HIGHSPEED |
> >>MMC_CAP_SD_HIGHSPEED;
> >>
> >> And even though we set HIGHSPEED, the card set their
> clock correctly.
> >>Is it
> >> right?
> >>
> >> mmc0: selected 26.000MHz transfer rate
> >> mmc0: clock 26000000Hz busmode 2 powermode 2 cs 0 Vdd
> 20 width 2
> >>timing 1
> >>
> >> Thank you,
> >> Kyungmin Park
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Linux-omap-open-source mailing list
> >> Linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
> >> http://linux.omap.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-omap-open-source
> >>
> >>
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Linux-omap-open-source mailing list
> >Linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
> >http://linux.omap.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-omap-open-source
>
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
2007-03-09 5:59 ` Kyungmin Park
@ 2007-03-09 6:16 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Syed Mohammed, Khasim @ 2007-03-09 6:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: kmpark, Pierre Ossman; +Cc: linux-omap-open-source
>I think highspeed depends on host clock. Is it right?
Yes.
Regards,
Khasim
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Kyungmin Park [mailto:kmpark@infradead.org]
>Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 12:00 AM
>To: Syed Mohammed, Khasim; 'Pierre Ossman'
>Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
>
>Yes, that's my understanding.
>
>If the card is 4.0 compliant and OMAP2 supports up to 48MHz. then we
use
>this 48MHz clock.
>
>But current mmc code down-grade to 20MHz since it's not set highspeed.
>
>If the card is 4.0 compliant and even though host don't support
highspeed
>feature, we set the highspeed flags for support host max clocks.
>I think highspeed depends on host clock. Is it right?
>
>Thank you,
>Kyungmin Park
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Syed Mohammed, Khasim [mailto:x0khasim@ti.com]
>> Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 2:18 PM
>> To: Syed Mohammed, Khasim; kmpark@infradead.org; Pierre Ossman
>> Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>> Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
>>
>> Sorry, small correction. It can support from 0 to 26 Mhz or 0
>> to 52 Mhz We should be able to configure 48Mhz.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Khasim
>>
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: linux-omap-open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com
>> [mailto:linux-omap-
>> >open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com] On Behalf Of Syed
>> Mohammed, Khasim
>> >Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 11:11 PM
>> >To: kmpark@infradead.org; Pierre Ossman
>> >Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>> >Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
>> >
>> >Hi Kyungmin,
>> >
>> >I haven't gone through the entire code as such, here is my
>> >understanding.
>> >
>> >>So if the the csd->mmca_vsn is CSD_SPEC_VER_4 then it always set
>> >highspeed.
>> >Yes, if card is 4.0 compliant then it's HS Card.
>> >
>> >>then what makes the highspeed enabled? host or card?
>> >Both - right? First controller should support such clock rates, and
>> card
>> >should be 4.0 (or more) compliant.
>> >
>> >>If the host supports up to 48MHz clock and card supports the
>> highspeed.
>> >>then what's the correct clock?
>> >If controller supports upto 48Mhz then I think we can only support
>> 26Mhz
>> >max. There are some special bits in 2430 processor to support 52 Mhz
>> >
>> >According to spec, a card can support both 52 & 26 or 26
>> (0x1 or 0x3).
>> >So, if our controller doesn't support 52Mhz clock rates then
>> we should
>> >stick to 26Mhz.
>> >
>> >Regards,
>> >Khasim
>> >
>> >>-----Original Message-----
>> >>From: Kyungmin Park [mailto:kmpark@infradead.org]
>> >>Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 8:42 PM
>> >>To: Syed Mohammed, Khasim; 'Pierre Ossman'
>> >>Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>> >>Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
>> >>
>> >>Hi Khasim,
>> >>
>> >>I checked the mmc code in linux-2.6.14-omap2420-omap2430. It is
used
>> >the
>> >>old samsung patch (mmcplus) in mmc core.
>> >>So if the the csd->mmca_vsn is CSD_SPEC_VER_4 then it always set
>> >highspeed.
>> >>the follwing code is always true if the chip is correct.
>> >>
>> >> if ((ext_csd->card_type & MMCPLUS_26MHZ) || (ext_csd-
>> >>>card_type & MMCPLUS_52MHZ)) {
>> >> err = mmc_switch_hsmode(host, card);
>> >> if (err != MMC_ERR_NONE) {
>> >> mmc_card_set_dead(card);
>> >> continue;
>> >> }
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >>then what makes the highspeed enabled? host or card?
>> >>If the host supports up to 48MHz clock and card supports the
>> highspeed.
>> >>then what's the correct clock?
>> >>
>> >>Currently if we don't set HIGHSPPED flags, it always set 20MHz as
in
>> >the
>> >>Spec. Since it is calculated from card->csd.max_dtr in
>> >>mmc_calculate_clock().
>> >>
>> >> list_for_each_entry(card, &host->cards, node)
>> >> if (!mmc_card_dead(card)) {
>> >> if (mmc_card_highspeed(card) &&
>> >mmc_card_sd(card))
>> >>{
>> >> if (max_dtr >
>> card->sw_caps.hs_max_dtr)
>> >> max_dtr =
>> >card->sw_caps.hs_max_dtr;
>> >> } else if (mmc_card_highspeed(card) &&
>> >>!mmc_card_sd(card)) {
>> >> if (max_dtr >
>> card->ext_csd.hs_max_dtr)
>> >> max_dtr =
>> >card->ext_csd.hs_max_dtr;
>> >> } else if (max_dtr > card->csd.max_dtr) {
>> >> max_dtr = card->csd.max_dtr;
>> >> }
>> >> }
>> >>
>> >>Okay I will check the MMC Spec.
>> >>
>> >>Thank you,
>> >>Kyungmin Park
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>________________________________
>> >>
>> >> From: Syed Mohammed, Khasim [mailto:x0khasim@ti.com]
>> >> Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 9:02 PM
>> >> To: kmpark@infradead.org; Pierre Ossman
>> >> Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>> >> Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Hi Kyungmin,
>> >>
>> >> OMAP2420 doesn't support High Speed. OMAP2430 does
>> support Highspeed.
>> >>
>> >> Please see our code for 2430 (its on linux.omap.com).
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Khasim
>> >>
>> >>________________________________
>> >>
>> >> From: linux-omap-open-source-bounces@linux.omap.com on
>> behalf of
>> >>Kyungmin Park
>> >> Sent: Thu 3/8/2007 1:28 AM
>> >> To: 'Pierre Ossman'
>> >> Cc: linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>> >> Subject: RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > Do _not_ take these flags lightly. If you enable them when
>> >> > the hardware doesn't support the alternative timing, you have
>> >> > a good chance of cards not working. So to me this looks very
>> >> > wrong as the pre-48MHz controllers probably only follow the
>> >> > legacy timing requirements.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I'm not sure OMAP2 MMC supports highspeed feature. I can't find
>> >>anytings in
>> >> OMAP2 TRM.
>> >>
>> >> if (cpu_class_is_omap2())
>> >> mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_MMC_HIGHSPEED |
>> >>MMC_CAP_SD_HIGHSPEED;
>> >>
>> >> mmc0: selected 48.000MHz transfer rate
>> >> mmc0: clock 48000000Hz busmode 2 powermode 2 cs 0 Vdd
>> 20 width 2
>> >>timing 1
>> >>
>> >> Then is it dependent on platform?
>> >>
>> >> if (minfo->highspeed)
>> >> mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_MMC_HIGHSPEED |
>> >>MMC_CAP_SD_HIGHSPEED;
>> >>
>> >> And even though we set HIGHSPEED, the card set their
>> clock correctly.
>> >>Is it
>> >> right?
>> >>
>> >> mmc0: selected 26.000MHz transfer rate
>> >> mmc0: clock 26000000Hz busmode 2 powermode 2 cs 0 Vdd
>> 20 width 2
>> >>timing 1
>> >>
>> >> Thank you,
>> >> Kyungmin Park
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Linux-omap-open-source mailing list
>> >> Linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>> >> http://linux.omap.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-omap-open-source
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >Linux-omap-open-source mailing list
>> >Linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>> >http://linux.omap.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-omap-open-source
>>
>>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
[not found] <45F0FC9F.3070701@drzeus.cx>
@ 2007-03-09 6:40 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Syed Mohammed, Khasim @ 2007-03-09 6:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pierre Ossman, kmpark; +Cc: linux-omap-open-source
Hi Pierre,
If I am not wrong what you mean is,
If (card_is_4.0) then its HS {
If (it supports 26 && 52) and ur controller can generate 52 Mhz
clk
then configure MMC_CLK to operate at 52Mhz
If (card supports only 26) then configure MMC_CLK at 26Mhz.
If (card can support upto 52 but controller can only support
till 48)
then configure MMC_CLK to 48 and issue a CMD4 to modify DSR (for
new
timing values).
Now this DSR timing depends on what Controller can offer and it
doesn't depend on the frequency as such. Is this what you mean?
}
Else{
Not an HS
}
Regards,
Khasim
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Pierre Ossman [mailto:drzeus@drzeus.cx]
>Sent: Friday, March 09, 2007 12:20 AM
>To: kmpark@infradead.org
>Cc: Syed Mohammed, Khasim; linux-omap-open-source@linux.omap.com
>Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
>
>Kyungmin Park wrote:
>> Yes, that's my understanding.
>>
>> If the card is 4.0 compliant and OMAP2 supports up to 48MHz. then we
use
>> this 48MHz clock.
>>
>> But current mmc code down-grade to 20MHz since it's not set
highspeed.
>>
>> If the card is 4.0 compliant and even though host don't support
highspeed
>> feature, we set the highspeed flags for support host max clocks.
>> I think highspeed depends on host clock. Is it right?
>>
>
>No, high-speed is a _timing_ capability, not one of frequency (although
the
>new
>timing allows a higher maximum frequency). Hence, maximum clock has
>_nothing_ to
>do with what it can support. All it can tell you is that reasonably,
this
>controller should support at least one of SD or MMC high-speed, but it
>cannot
>tell you which.
>
>Rgds
>Pierre
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2
2007-03-09 3:31 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
@ 2007-03-29 20:13 ` Tony Lindgren
0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Tony Lindgren @ 2007-03-29 20:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Syed Mohammed, Khasim; +Cc: linux-omap-open-source, kmpark
Hi,
* Syed Mohammed, Khasim <x0khasim@ti.com> [070308 23:38]:
> Hi Kyungmin,
>
> For OMAP2420 there are few MMC erratas,
>
> 1. If MMC controller is configured for 4bit and if MMC CLK frequency is
> over 24Mhz it has as a diminishing impact on throughput. Hence, it is
> not recommended to use a clock over 24MHz for MMC 4 bits mode.
> >@@ -1096,7 +1098,10 @@ static int __init mmc_omap_probe(struct
> >platform_device *pdev)
> >
> > mmc->ops = &mmc_omap_ops;
> > mmc->f_min = 400000;
> >- mmc->f_max = 24000000;
> >+ if (cpu_class_is_omap2())
> >+ mmc->f_max = 48000000;
> >+ else
> >+ mmc->f_max = 24000000;
> > mmc->ocr_avail = MMC_VDD_32_33 | MMC_VDD_33_34;
> > mmc->caps = MMC_CAP_MULTIWRITE | MMC_CAP_BYTEBLOCK;
How about throwing a cpu_is_omap2420() in there to work around the
clock limitation above mentioned by Khasim?
Tony
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-03-29 20:13 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-03-07 7:44 [PATCH] ARM: OMAP: MMC performance upgrade on OMAP2 Kyungmin Park
2007-03-08 6:06 ` Kyungmin Park
[not found] ` <45EFA96D.9010604@drzeus.cx>
2007-03-08 7:28 ` Kyungmin Park
2007-03-08 12:02 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
[not found] ` <45F00C93.2000305@drzeus.cx>
2007-03-08 13:16 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
2007-03-09 2:41 ` Kyungmin Park
2007-03-09 5:10 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
2007-03-09 5:18 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
2007-03-09 5:59 ` Kyungmin Park
2007-03-09 6:16 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
2007-03-09 3:31 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
2007-03-29 20:13 ` Tony Lindgren
[not found] <45F0FC9F.3070701@drzeus.cx>
2007-03-09 6:40 ` Syed Mohammed, Khasim
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox