From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jaehoon Chung Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 13:07:56 +0900 Subject: [U-Boot] mmc: sdhci: Add a quirk to add delay during completion of sdhci_send_cmd In-Reply-To: <51623F0A.20807@linaro.org> References: <51623F0A.20807@linaro.org> Message-ID: <5162429C.7040400@samsung.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi, On 04/08/2013 12:52 PM, Tushar Behera wrote: > On 04/07/2013 10:27 AM, Jagan Teki wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I saw that you have been added the SDHCI_QUIRK_WAIT_SEND_CMD on below commit >> http://git.denx.de/?p=u-boot.git;a=commitdiff;h=13243f2eafc4292917178051fe1bb5aab2774dca >> >> I need few quires regarding the QUIRK delay. >> 1. Why the delay is 1000 >> + if (host->quirks & SDHCI_QUIRK_WAIT_SEND_CMD) >> + udelay(1000); >> + >> 2. is this delay specific to s5p_sdhci controller? > > This was specific to s5p_sdhci driver so as to replicate the behavior of > s5p_mmc driver. It didn't be denoted to use the udelay(1000) in spec. But To ensure the completing previous request, it has added the udelay(1000). > >> 3. I have an issue "Controller never released inhibit bit(s)" >> but when I enable this quirk on my driver with udelay(10000), it's >> working. udelay(10000)? It's too long delay time for completing the request. Which SoC do you use? If we can use the get_timer() for busy-waiting, i think that we can remove the udelay(). Best Regards, Jaehoon Chung > > I am not sure about the exact delay as per the spec. I have added > Jaehoon to CC who might have additional information about this. > >> >> Could you please help me. >> >> Thanks, >> Jagan. >> > >