To properly manage commands awaiting R1B responses, the capability
MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY is enabled in mmci driver, for stm32 variant.
The issue was seen on STM32MP157C-EV1 board, with an erase command,
with secure erase argument, letting the card stuck, possibly waiting
for 4 hours before timeout.
Fixes: 94fe2580a2f3 ("mmc: core: Enable erase/discard/trim support for all mmc hosts")
Signed-off-by: Yann Gautier <[email protected]>
---
This is somehow a v2 for patch [1].
Changes:
- Only apply MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY to stm32 variant
- Cap the used timeout written to MMCIDATATIMER (when using
MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY, cmd->busy_timeout may be greater than
host->max_busy_timeout)
[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-mmc/patch/[email protected]/
drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c | 8 +++++++-
drivers/mmc/host/mmci_stm32_sdmmc.c | 1 +
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c
index 17dbc81c221e..89e0e9ccfb71 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c
@@ -1242,7 +1242,13 @@ mmci_start_command(struct mmci_host *host, struct mmc_command *cmd, u32 c)
if (!cmd->busy_timeout)
cmd->busy_timeout = 10 * MSEC_PER_SEC;
- clks = (unsigned long long)cmd->busy_timeout * host->cclk;
+ if (host->mmc->caps & MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY &&
+ host->mmc->max_busy_timeout &&
+ cmd->busy_timeout > host->mmc->max_busy_timeout)
+ clks = (unsigned long long)host->mmc->max_busy_timeout * host->cclk;
+ else
+ clks = (unsigned long long)cmd->busy_timeout * host->cclk;
+
do_div(clks, MSEC_PER_SEC);
writel_relaxed(clks, host->base + MMCIDATATIMER);
}
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci_stm32_sdmmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci_stm32_sdmmc.c
index 51db30acf4dc..2ad577618324 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci_stm32_sdmmc.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci_stm32_sdmmc.c
@@ -522,6 +522,7 @@ void sdmmc_variant_init(struct mmci_host *host)
host->ops = &sdmmc_variant_ops;
host->pwr_reg = readl_relaxed(host->base + MMCIPOWER);
+ host->mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY;
base_dlyb = devm_of_iomap(mmc_dev(host->mmc), np, 1, NULL);
if (IS_ERR(base_dlyb))
--
2.17.1
On Thu, 25 Feb 2021 at 15:55, Yann Gautier <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> To properly manage commands awaiting R1B responses, the capability
> MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY is enabled in mmci driver, for stm32 variant.
> The issue was seen on STM32MP157C-EV1 board, with an erase command,
> with secure erase argument, letting the card stuck, possibly waiting
> for 4 hours before timeout.
>
> Fixes: 94fe2580a2f3 ("mmc: core: Enable erase/discard/trim support for all mmc hosts")
>
> Signed-off-by: Yann Gautier <[email protected]>
> ---
> This is somehow a v2 for patch [1].
> Changes:
> - Only apply MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY to stm32 variant
> - Cap the used timeout written to MMCIDATATIMER (when using
> MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY, cmd->busy_timeout may be greater than
> host->max_busy_timeout)
>
> [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-mmc/patch/[email protected]/
>
> drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c | 8 +++++++-
> drivers/mmc/host/mmci_stm32_sdmmc.c | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c
> index 17dbc81c221e..89e0e9ccfb71 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c
> @@ -1242,7 +1242,13 @@ mmci_start_command(struct mmci_host *host, struct mmc_command *cmd, u32 c)
> if (!cmd->busy_timeout)
> cmd->busy_timeout = 10 * MSEC_PER_SEC;
>
> - clks = (unsigned long long)cmd->busy_timeout * host->cclk;
> + if (host->mmc->caps & MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY &&
> + host->mmc->max_busy_timeout &&
> + cmd->busy_timeout > host->mmc->max_busy_timeout)
We are already within "if (host->variant->busy_timeout ....", a few
lines above, which means this can be simplified into:
if (cmd->busy_timeout > host->mmc->max_busy_timeout)
> + clks = (unsigned long long)host->mmc->max_busy_timeout * host->cclk;
> + else
> + clks = (unsigned long long)cmd->busy_timeout * host->cclk;
> +
> do_div(clks, MSEC_PER_SEC);
> writel_relaxed(clks, host->base + MMCIDATATIMER);
> }
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci_stm32_sdmmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci_stm32_sdmmc.c
> index 51db30acf4dc..2ad577618324 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci_stm32_sdmmc.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci_stm32_sdmmc.c
> @@ -522,6 +522,7 @@ void sdmmc_variant_init(struct mmci_host *host)
>
> host->ops = &sdmmc_variant_ops;
> host->pwr_reg = readl_relaxed(host->base + MMCIPOWER);
> + host->mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY;
To make it more clear that this is for variants having the
->busy_timeout flag set, I suggest to move this into mmci_probe().
>
> base_dlyb = devm_of_iomap(mmc_dev(host->mmc), np, 1, NULL);
> if (IS_ERR(base_dlyb))
> --
> 2.17.1
>
Well, I decided to help out a bit. I have amend the patch according to
the above and extended the commit message with some valuable
information, based upon our earlier discussions.
Patch is applied at my fixes branch with a stable tag, please have a
look, test and shout at me if there is something that looks wrong!
Thanks and kind regards
Uffe
On 3/2/21 11:40 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Feb 2021 at 15:55, Yann Gautier <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> To properly manage commands awaiting R1B responses, the capability
>> MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY is enabled in mmci driver, for stm32 variant.
>> The issue was seen on STM32MP157C-EV1 board, with an erase command,
>> with secure erase argument, letting the card stuck, possibly waiting
>> for 4 hours before timeout.
>>
>> Fixes: 94fe2580a2f3 ("mmc: core: Enable erase/discard/trim support for all mmc hosts")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yann Gautier <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> This is somehow a v2 for patch [1].
>> Changes:
>> - Only apply MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY to stm32 variant
>> - Cap the used timeout written to MMCIDATATIMER (when using
>> MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY, cmd->busy_timeout may be greater than
>> host->max_busy_timeout)
>>
>> [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-mmc/patch/[email protected]/
>>
>> drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c | 8 +++++++-
>> drivers/mmc/host/mmci_stm32_sdmmc.c | 1 +
>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c
>> index 17dbc81c221e..89e0e9ccfb71 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c
>> @@ -1242,7 +1242,13 @@ mmci_start_command(struct mmci_host *host, struct mmc_command *cmd, u32 c)
>> if (!cmd->busy_timeout)
>> cmd->busy_timeout = 10 * MSEC_PER_SEC;
>>
>> - clks = (unsigned long long)cmd->busy_timeout * host->cclk;
>> + if (host->mmc->caps & MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY &&
>> + host->mmc->max_busy_timeout &&
>> + cmd->busy_timeout > host->mmc->max_busy_timeout)
>
> We are already within "if (host->variant->busy_timeout ....", a few
> lines above, which means this can be simplified into:
>
> if (cmd->busy_timeout > host->mmc->max_busy_timeout)
>
>> + clks = (unsigned long long)host->mmc->max_busy_timeout * host->cclk;
>> + else
>> + clks = (unsigned long long)cmd->busy_timeout * host->cclk;
>> +
>> do_div(clks, MSEC_PER_SEC);
>> writel_relaxed(clks, host->base + MMCIDATATIMER);
>> }
>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci_stm32_sdmmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci_stm32_sdmmc.c
>> index 51db30acf4dc..2ad577618324 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci_stm32_sdmmc.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci_stm32_sdmmc.c
>> @@ -522,6 +522,7 @@ void sdmmc_variant_init(struct mmci_host *host)
>>
>> host->ops = &sdmmc_variant_ops;
>> host->pwr_reg = readl_relaxed(host->base + MMCIPOWER);
>> + host->mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY;
>
> To make it more clear that this is for variants having the
> ->busy_timeout flag set, I suggest to move this into mmci_probe().
>
>>
>> base_dlyb = devm_of_iomap(mmc_dev(host->mmc), np, 1, NULL);
>> if (IS_ERR(base_dlyb))
>> --
>> 2.17.1
>>
>
> Well, I decided to help out a bit. I have amend the patch according to
> the above and extended the commit message with some valuable
> information, based upon our earlier discussions.
>
> Patch is applied at my fixes branch with a stable tag, please have a
> look, test and shout at me if there is something that looks wrong!
>
> Thanks and kind regards
> Uffe
>
Hi Ulf,
Thanks a lot for the updated patch.
I've tested it on STM32MP157C-EV1. The MMC_TEST full campaigns for both
SD-card and eMMC run OK.
Best regards,
Yann