From: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
To: Sjoerd Simons <sjoerd.simons@collabora.co.uk>
Cc: Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@ti.com>,
linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org, kernel@collabora.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Hongjie Fang <hongjiefang@asrmicro.com>,
Bastian Stender <bst@pengutronix.de>,
Kyle Roeschley <kyle.roeschley@ni.com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>,
Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@rock-chips.com>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
Harish Jenny K N <harish_kandiga@mentor.com>,
Simon Horman <horms+renesas@verge.net.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: Remove timeout when enabling cache
Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2018 09:47:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20181107084741.GA31092@kunai> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <303b49cbb5b687d6b6a7ad4048eda459586c0806.camel@collabora.co.uk>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 739 bytes --]
> That also happens to be one of the cards we deploy; However i did
> wonder about adding a quirk but decided against it as it was not clear
> to me from the specification that CACHE ON really is meant to complete
> within GENERIC_CMD6_TIMEOUT. That and i fret about ending up in hit-a-
> mole games as the failure is really quite tedious (boot failure).
I agree that we should use the more defensive variant as a default. I
mean there should be no performance regression since most cards will
respond just faster, or? The only downside I could see is that we might
miss a real timeout with no bounds set and might get stuck? Maybe it is
worth contacting eMMC spec people to at least know what is the expected
behaviour?
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-07 8:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-11-06 13:30 [PATCH] mmc: core: Remove timeout when enabling cache Sjoerd Simons
2018-11-06 14:04 ` Faiz Abbas
2018-11-06 15:01 ` Sjoerd Simons
2018-11-07 8:47 ` Wolfram Sang [this message]
2018-11-20 9:24 ` Ulf Hansson
2018-11-20 10:09 ` Faiz Abbas
2018-11-20 10:23 ` Wolfram Sang
2018-11-20 10:39 ` Faiz Abbas
2018-11-20 10:58 ` Wolfram Sang
2018-11-20 11:38 ` Sjoerd Simons
2018-11-20 13:08 ` Ulf Hansson
2018-11-20 14:00 ` Sjoerd Simons
2018-11-20 14:24 ` Ulf Hansson
2018-11-20 14:55 ` Sjoerd Simons
2018-11-20 22:26 ` 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=20181107084741.GA31092@kunai \
--to=wsa@the-dreams.de \
--cc=bst@pengutronix.de \
--cc=faiz_abbas@ti.com \
--cc=harish_kandiga@mentor.com \
--cc=hongjiefang@asrmicro.com \
--cc=horms+renesas@verge.net.au \
--cc=kernel@collabora.com \
--cc=kyle.roeschley@ni.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shawn.lin@rock-chips.com \
--cc=sjoerd.simons@collabora.co.uk \
--cc=ulf.hansson@linaro.org \
--cc=wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.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