Re: [PATCH] mmc: core: Add new flag to force hardware reset

Wenchao Chen
2024-01-11T06:05:47Z

On Mon, 6 Nov 2023 at 22:20, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 6 Nov 2023 at 13:26, Michael Wu <michael@allwinnertech.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 9/25/2023 9:59 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > > - trimmed cc-list, + Sartak Garg
> > >
> > > On Thu, 14 Sept 2023 at 10:00, Wenchao Chen <wenchao.chen666@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On Thu, 14 Sept 2023 at 08:04, Michael Wu <michael@allwinnertech.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> Entering the recovery system itself indicates a transmission error.
> > >>> In this situation, we intend to execute the mmc_blk_reset function
> > >>> to clear any anomalies that may be caused by errors. We have previously
> > >>> discussed with several MMC device manufacturers, and they expressed
> > >>> their desire for us to reset the device when errors occur to ensure
> > >>> stable operation. We aim to make this code compatible with all devices
> > >>> and ensure its stable performance, so we would like to add this patch
> > >>>
> > >>> Signed-off-by: Michael Wu <michael@allwinnertech.com>
> > >>
> > >> like: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mmc/20220603051534.22672-1-quic_sartgarg@quicinc.com/
> > >
> > > Looks like this series didn't make it. I was awaiting a rebase from
> > > Sartak to apply it, but apparently something got in his way for a new
> > > submission.
> > >
> > >>
> > >> You should enable it in the vendor host.
> > >
> > > Yes! We don't want unused code in the core. We need a user of it too.
> > >
> > > May I suggest that you pick up Sartak's patch for the core and thus
> > > add another patch for the host driver you care about and then
> > > re-submit it as a small series.
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > > Uffe
> > >
> > >>
> > >>> ---
> > >>> drivers/mmc/core/block.c | 2 +-
> > >>> include/linux/mmc/host.h | 1 +
> > >>> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >>>
> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/block.c b/drivers/mmc/core/block.c
> > >>> index b5b414a71e0b..29fbe0ddeadb 100644
> > >>> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/block.c
> > >>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/block.c
> > >>> @@ -1503,7 +1503,7 @@ void mmc_blk_cqe_recovery(struct mmc_queue *mq)
> > >>> pr_debug("%s: CQE recovery start\n", mmc_hostname(host));
> > >>>
> > >>> err = mmc_cqe_recovery(host);
> > >>> - if (err)
> > >>> + if (err || host->cqe_recovery_reset_always)
> > >>> mmc_blk_reset(mq->blkdata, host, MMC_BLK_CQE_RECOVERY);
> > >>> mmc_blk_reset_success(mq->blkdata, MMC_BLK_CQE_RECOVERY);
> > >>>
> > >>> diff --git a/include/linux/mmc/host.h b/include/linux/mmc/host.h
> > >>> index 62a6847a3b6f..f578541a06b5 100644
> > >>> --- a/include/linux/mmc/host.h
> > >>> +++ b/include/linux/mmc/host.h
> > >>> @@ -518,6 +518,7 @@ struct mmc_host {
> > >>> int cqe_qdepth;
> > >>> bool cqe_enabled;
> > >>> bool cqe_on;
> > >>> + bool cqe_recovery_reset_always;
> > >>>
> > >>> /* Inline encryption support */
> > >>> #ifdef CONFIG_MMC_CRYPTO
> > >>> --
> > >>> 2.29.0
> > >>>
> > Dear Ulf,
> > I have tested Sartak's patch and it is also able to resolve the issue we
> > are currently facing. Therefore, I would like to inquire about the
> > expected timeline for merging Sartak's patch.
>
Hi Sartak

Any updates?

> Hi Michael,
>
> There is another series [1] that Adrian is working on that is related
> to the problem in $subject patch. Perhaps you can take a look and try
> it out instead of Sartak's patch, which seems to have gotten stalled.
>
> Kind regards
> Uffe
>
> [1]
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231103084720.6886-1-adrian.hunter@intel.com/