public inbox for u-boot@lists.denx.de
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alagu Sankar <alagusankar@embwise.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] mmc: modified calculated mmc-capacity & set mmc trans_speed
Date: Thu, 13 May 2010 10:44:00 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BEB8A98.90305@embwise.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimmcLD3BeH4A_inpowAu02dkUjeXINH1G14DuXO@mail.gmail.com>

As part of few other fixes and enhancements to u-boot MMC code, I sent a 
similar but slightly different patch yesterday.  I have an eMMC 
High-Capacity card (4GB) and it works fine with this patch.  But I do 
believe there are 4GB MMC cards that don't advertise them as 
High-Capacity cards and work with the byte addressing.  By the way, how 
do I make sure that the fixes and enhancements that I submit are in line 
with what is expected and becomes part of the mainline code.

- Alagu Sankar

Minkyu Kang wrote:
> Dear Andy,
>
> On 7 May 2010 16:52, Andy Fleming <afleming@gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Jae hoon Chung <jh80.chung@gmail.com> wrote:
>>     
>>> Dear Andy
>>>
>>> Thanks for your comment..
>>> but i have some question...
>>>
>>> 2010/5/7 Andy Fleming <afleming@gmail.com>:
>>>       
>>>> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 10:36 PM, Jae hoon Chung <jh80.chung@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>         
>>>>> The patches do the following
>>>>> 1. If mmc size is more than 2GB , we need to calculated using the
>>>>> extended csd register.
>>>>>           
>>>> This description is slightly inaccurate.  I have encountered MMC cards
>>>> with 4GB capacity, which are not actually high-capacity cards.  But
>>>> certainly there's a bug in the current code where high-capacity MMC
>>>> cards are not getting proper size calculations.
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> that means 4GB capacity is not high-capacity cards, right?
>>> i understood that higher than 2GB is supported high-capacity..
>>> if i mis-understood, i'll check the spec.
>>>       
>> Well, the spec says anything over 2GB is high capacity, and should be
>> accessed using block addressing.  However, the 4GB card I used
>> reported itself as not high-capacity, and was addressable via byte
>> addressing.  This works, because 4GB is addressable that way, but it's
>> technically in violation of the spec.
>>
>>
>>     
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/mmc.c
>>>>> index cf4ea16..c985924 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/mmc.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/mmc.c
>>>>> @@ -410,6 +410,10 @@ int mmc_change_freq(struct mmc *mmc)
>>>>>        if (ext_csd[212] || ext_csd[213] || ext_csd[214] || ext_csd[215])
>>>>>                mmc->high_capacity = 1;
>>>>>
>>>>> +       if (mmc->high_capacity)
>>>>> +               mmc->capacity = ((ext_csd[215] << 24) | (ext_csd[214] << 16) |
>>>>> +                               (ext_csd[213] << 8) | ext_csd[212]);
>>>>> +
>>>>>           
>>>> This is off by a factor of block size.  Capacity is supposed to be the
>>>> size in bytes, and this sets it to the size in blocks, I believe.
>>>>
>>>> Hmm... I don't like that we are now doing the calculation twice for
>>>> high-capacity MMC cards, but I guess that's fine for now, as this only
>>>> affects v4 and higher, and extracting it is a bit more of a pain than
>>>> I originally thought.
>>>>
>>>> On a side note, does this mean you have a high-capacity MMC card?  And
>>>> can you point me to a place to get one?  We've been trying to test MMC
>>>> high-capacity for a while, and have yet to find a real one (we found
>>>> that 4GB one I mentioned, and it does normal byte-addressing).
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> didn't you have high-capacity card?
>>> we tested with 8GB moviNAND card, below is mmc card information using
>>> that code..
>>>       
>> Hmm...I'm not managing to find an actual card online for sale.  Do you
>> have a link?  We had a high-capacity SD card, but no MMC card.
>>
>>
>>     
>>> Tran Speed: 52000000
>>> Rd Block Len: 512
>>> MMC version 4.3
>>> High Capacity: Yes
>>> Capacity: 7840 MByte
>>> Bus Width: 4-bit
>>>
>>> and if card is higher than 2GB, access mode selected sector mode..
>>> why does card do normal byte-addressing?
>>>       
>> Yours is clearly a proper high-capacity card.  :)
>>     
>
> So, what is the conclusion or this patch?
> Modify the patch? or NAK this patch?
> Please let him know.
>
> Thanks
> Minkyu Kang
>   

  reply	other threads:[~2010-05-13  5:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-04-08  3:36 [U-Boot] [PATCH] mmc: modified calculated mmc-capacity & set mmc trans_speed Jae hoon Chung
2010-04-08 12:34 ` Minkyu Kang
2010-05-05 22:03 ` Wolfgang Denk
2010-05-06 15:35 ` Andy Fleming
2010-05-07  6:45   ` Jae hoon Chung
2010-05-07  7:52     ` Andy Fleming
2010-05-12 14:48       ` Minkyu Kang
2010-05-13  5:14         ` Alagu Sankar [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-03-02 10:13 [U-Boot] [Patch] MMC: modified calculated mmc-capacity & set mmc trans speed Jae hoon Chung
2010-03-02 12:35 ` Wolfgang Denk

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=4BEB8A98.90305@embwise.com \
    --to=alagusankar@embwise.com \
    --cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
    /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