Re: SDHCI regression since 2.6.39

Philip Rakity
2011-09-13T20:36:07Z

What card are you using ?

On Sep 13, 2011, at 1:27 PM, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:

> On 09/13/2011 12:29 PM, Manoj Iyer wrote:
>>
>> @Jeremy, Could the problem be BIOS related? we have seen a number of
>> issues with older bioses on the x220s.
>
> I have 1.17 installed at the moment. It looks like 1.21 is current, so
> I could try updating it. But the Fedora 15 2.6.38 kernel worked fine
> with this controller and cards, so I don't think BIOS version is an
> issue. Also, there's nothing obviously related to the SD controller in
> the release notes (not that I trust their competeness).
>
> J
>
>
>>
>> Here are a few cards I tested with the 3.1 RC4 kernel on Ubuntu
>> running on
>> a Lenovo X220. with Ricoh e823 card reader.
>>
>> == kernel version ==
>> Linux u 3.1.0-0301rc4-generic #201108290905 SMP MonO Aug 29 09:11:07
>> UTC 2011 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
>> This is the upstream RC4 kernel build for ubuntu.
>> http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/
>>
>> == LSPCI output for SD card reader ==
>> 0d:00.0 System peripheral [0880]: Ricoh Co Ltd Device [1180:e823] (rev
>> 04) (prog-if 01)
>> Subsystem: Lenovo Device [17aa:21db]
>> Control: I/O- Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop-
>> ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx-
>> Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort-
>> <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx-
>> Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 64 bytes
>> Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 16
>> Region 0: Memory at 91500000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=256]
>> Capabilities: [50] MSI: Enable- Count=1/1 Maskable- 64bit+
>> Address: 0000000000000000 Data: 0000
>> Capabilities: [78] Power Management version 3
>> Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1+ D2+ AuxCurrent=0mA
>> PME(D0+,D1+,D2+,D3hot+,D3cold+)
>> Status: D0 NoSoftRst- PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=2 PME+
>> Capabilities: [80] Express (v1) Endpoint, MSI 00
>> DevCap: MaxPayload 128 bytes, PhantFunc 0, Latency L0s
>> unlimited, L1 unlimited
>> ExtTag- AttnBtn+ AttnInd+ PwrInd+ RBE+ FLReset-
>> DevCtl: Report errors: Correctable- Non-Fatal- Fatal-
>> Unsupported-
>> RlxdOrd+ ExtTag- PhantFunc- AuxPwr- NoSnoop+
>> MaxPayload 128 bytes, MaxReadReq 128 bytes
>> DevSta: CorrErr+ UncorrErr- FatalErr- UnsuppReq+ AuxPwr-
>> TransPend-
>> LnkCap: Port #1, Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x1, ASPM L0s L1,
>> Latency L0 <4us, L1 unlimited
>> ClockPM+ Surprise- LLActRep- BwNot-
>> LnkCtl: ASPM L1 Enabled; RCB 64 bytes Disabled- Retrain-
>> CommClk+
>> ExtSynch- ClockPM- AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt-
>> LnkSta: Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x1, TrErr- Train- SlotClk+
>> DLActive- BWMgmt- ABWMgmt-
>> Capabilities: [100 v1] Virtual Channel
>> Caps: LPEVC=0 RefClk=100ns PATEntryBits=1
>> Arb: Fixed- WRR32- WRR64- WRR128-
>> Ctrl: ArbSelect=Fixed
>> Status: InProgress-
>> VC0: Caps: PATOffset=00 MaxTimeSlots=1 RejSnoopTrans-
>> Arb: Fixed- WRR32- WRR64- WRR128- TWRR128- WRR256-
>> Ctrl: Enable+ ID=0 ArbSelect=Fixed TC/VC=ff
>> Status: NegoPending- InProgress-
>> Capabilities: [800 v1] Advanced Error Reporting
>> UESta: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt-
>> RxOF- MalfTLP- ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol-
>> UEMsk: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt-
>> RxOF- MalfTLP- ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol-
>> UESvrt: DLP+ SDES+ TLP- FCP+ CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt-
>> RxOF+ MalfTLP+ ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol-
>> CESta: RxErr+ BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr+
>> CEMsk: RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr+
>> AERCap: First Error Pointer: 00, GenCap+ CGenEn- ChkCap+
>> ChkEn-
>> Kernel driver in use: sdhci-pci
>> Kernel modules: sdhci-pci
>>
>> == Sandisk Extreme Pro 16GB ==
>> Was able to mount Ultra high speed SDHC card 45MB/s, read and write
>> works.
>>
>> [ 60.578630] mmc0: new ultra high speed SDHC card at address e624
>> [ 60.611808] mmcblk0: mmc0:e624 SD16G 14.8 GiB [ 60.644314]
>> mmcblk0: p1
>> [ 60.947772] mmcblk0: error -84 transferring data, sector 8192, nr
>> 8, cmd response 0x900, card status 0xb00
>> [ 60.947777] mmcblk0: retrying using single block read
>>
>> /dev/mmcblk0p1 on /media/New Volume type vfat
>> (rw,nosuid,nodev,uid=1000,gid=1000,shortname=mixed,dmask=0077,utf8=1,showexec,flush,uhelper=udisks)
>>
>> == Sandisk 2GB SD card ==
>> Was able to mount Sandisk SD card, read and write works.
>> [ 298.540999] mmc0: new SD card at address 0002
>> [ 298.541306] mmcblk0: mmc0:0002 00000 1.86 GiB [ 298.543157]
>> mmcblk0: p1
>>
>> /dev/mmcblk0p1 on /media/E0FD-1813 type vfat
>> (rw,nosuid,nodev,uid=1000,gid=1000,shortname=mixed,dmask=0077,utf8=1,showexec,flush,uhelper=udisks)
>>
>> == Transcend 2GB MMC plus card ==
>> Was able to mount and read/write. Shows up as SD card.
>> [ 734.032981] mmc0: error -110 whilst initialising MMC card
>> [ 734.132920] mmc0: error -110 whilst initialising MMC card
>> [ 734.228244] mmc0: new MMC card at address 0001
>> [ 734.228631] mmcblk0: mmc0:0001 MMC 1.87 GiB [ 734.229834]
>> mmcblk0: p1
>> u@u:~$
>>
>> /dev/mmcblk0p1 on /media/New Volume type vfat
>> (rw,nosuid,nodev,uid=1000,gid=1000,shortname=mixed,dmask=0077,utf8=1,showexec,flush,uhelper=udisks)
>>
>> Cheers
>> --
>> ====================
>> Manoj Iyer
>> Ubuntu/Canonical
>> Hardware Enablement
>> ====================
>>
>>
>> On Tue, 13 Sep 2011, Chris Ball wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 13 2011, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>>>>> If it is running, and not helping, can I persuade you to try a full
>>>>> bisection?
>>>>
>>>> OK, will do.
>>>
>>> Thank you!
>>>
>>>>> I don't think we have other reports of this bug, and the
>>>>> only other person who has reported something like it wasn't a kernel
>>>>> hacker.
>>>>
>>>> That's interesting; the X220 is a pretty common machine these days, I
>>>> think. I wonder if there's variations in the SD controller or
>>>> something?
>>>
>>> I just asked Matthew Garrett to check his X220, and his has the same
>>> e823
>>> controller as you, is running a 3.1-rc kernel, and everything's working.
>>>
>>> So it's not even variation in the controller model, it's something even
>>> more subtle. Perhaps try some different cards? What capacity/speed is
>>> the one you're trying? If there is a per-card difference, I suppose
>>> we'd expect it to be that slower cards work and faster cards fail
>>> (given the nature of the patch I linked in my last mail).
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> - Chris.
>>> --
>>> Chris Ball <cjb@laptop.org> <http://printf.net/>
>>> One Laptop Per Child
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> 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