From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Nelson Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 17:11:38 -0700 Subject: [U-Boot] [RFC PATCH 2/2] mmc: add support for block device cache In-Reply-To: <56F03E1B.20501@nelint.com> References: <56E9A92F.5000205@nelint.com> <1458164424-15363-1-git-send-email-eric@nelint.com> <1458164424-15363-3-git-send-email-eric@nelint.com> <56EB2060.8040309@wwwdotorg.org> <56EEFB99.2080805@nelint.com> <20160320221332.GU23166@bill-the-cat> <56EF2A3C.603@nelint.com> <56F03E1B.20501@nelint.com> Message-ID: <56F5D3BA.8060204@nelint.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 all, On 03/21/2016 11:31 AM, Eric Nelson wrote: > On 03/20/2016 03:54 PM, Eric Nelson wrote: >> On 03/20/2016 03:13 PM, Tom Rini wrote: >>> On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 12:35:53PM -0700, Eric Nelson wrote: >>>> On 03/17/2016 02:23 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: >>>>> On 03/16/2016 03:40 PM, Eric Nelson wrote: >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Eric Nelson >>>>> ... >> I'm seeing some build breakage on master surrounding the use >> of DM though. >> Peng's patch made it clear that DM wasn't supported by fsl_esdhc. >> If I select DM and BLK on top of nitrogen6q_defconfig, I get >> lots of build errors. >> It's CONFIG_BLK that produces lots of issues, and from what I can tell, it's only currently supported for sandbox. Out of ignorance, I was conflating the two. >> I want to get a V2 RFC patch out before digging through the >> details of that. >> > > I'm obviously not up to speed on the state of DM and I hadn't > seen Simon's patch adding blk.h. > > The new blk_dread/write/erase functions do provide a convenient > spot for checking cache, though they're not universally used yet. > > In particular, hooking up the cache there will lose visibility > into things like the "mmc write" command. > > I'm also not sure of the current state of DM with respect to > block drivers and wonder if a block cache should wait a cycle > or two. > > Simon, I'd appreciate some feedback when you have a chance. > I think I have a better handle on this now. I'm still a bit confused on what needs to be done in order for CONFIG_BLK to work against real hardware. >From what I can tell, the some modules in cmd/ need to be updated to use blk_dread/blk_dwrite/blk_derase and some kind of re-structuring needs to occur in drivers/mmc to support the "blk" uclass. Does that sound about right? Is somebody currently working on this? Please advise, Eric