Received: by 2002:ac0:8c9a:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id r26csp3616927ima; Mon, 4 Feb 2019 02:10:41 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN5RHIxpCH/dnBk+uX2HrIYqyAmbf5oJUE50wGm3uULsD+11TSIfDKzWVgd7dke/WlAUIcyF X-Received: by 2002:a63:111c:: with SMTP id g28mr45143511pgl.85.1549275041075; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 02:10:41 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1549275041; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=rqi7Gg1/68oaVZK4Rup8MjaGnyMDNJPStwyWrglQTfavddZsZw/50+yQKlFhGrcQ2W ryMLOW9vg7Smb72jAEB7PaQNHxHFP1oV4HSU8vzQKgRg8qletaG4l5z8IloAYz9waPVs uLZFZcfInqYuUOn0W19c9YZh9/zGglKUhFWB+aY+9A4l5qwS2OBgMcemNCUKNLFDvox8 2nbxLKdHdEeChGJD7IPXibQo/WS6M/csphmhUla78tlDaDoL1Z94C7uxulCcZpfXJQtO 3saDW0Hd/7AYZ65LhCFRH/nDPbbqf66pz3fnjX/QN24SGP2XE8qktjJGEUTz58lL6Bm7 cogg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:organization:from:references:cc:to:subject; bh=eloCphbCmsjsqaI9rOwqU7R2siOFdQOLI7tKBtX4K10=; b=W3myuhkiSmFjdEePSa6bIct2YP3ztYxzmkUd541vyGwVwx1zvTgzyXfummpw5XpAMS yLyB3zfzuGeT4EkLgaEpCuZ6XGpcEN2RTpZKLVm5ltUCvsv31JQuXACiCQINIdk1EYT6 8096+2Vkhqep7Yyu9OqGLwqLFT6f9/IWLZ5WqyWNoFaSsuyb7GuztByn1eI8xvfv8UL3 gnWqDBjKnGjNvI6j00IfqDWCEohQWacxqpFCiGce/F9id+OAWzTm+grH4jfVxfaJnaDE JCzHXlZjCuRnGqzrcL4Va7/XPrPDvTL4YaTtozn7QUGWq9KtBW2MYgUXYYGaMYJGvS9d Bu0Q== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id f124si15621223pfa.1.2019.02.04.02.10.25; Mon, 04 Feb 2019 02:10:41 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=intel.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729159AbfBDJ6c (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 4 Feb 2019 04:58:32 -0500 Received: from mga03.intel.com ([134.134.136.65]:12497 "EHLO mga03.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728254AbfBDJ6b (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Feb 2019 04:58:31 -0500 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga006.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.51]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 Feb 2019 01:58:31 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.56,559,1539673200"; d="scan'208";a="113507866" Received: from ahunter-desktop.fi.intel.com (HELO [10.237.72.56]) ([10.237.72.56]) by orsmga006.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 04 Feb 2019 01:58:27 -0800 Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: mmc: Fix HS setting in mmc_hs400_to_hs200() To: Ulf Hansson , Chaotian Jing Cc: Matthias Brugger , Shawn Lin , Simon Horman , Kyle Roeschley , Hongjie Fang , Harish Jenny K N , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Linux ARM , linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, srv_heupstream References: <1548921212-5219-1-git-send-email-chaotian.jing@mediatek.com> <1548985091.10251.26.camel@mhfsdcap03> From: Adrian Hunter Organization: Intel Finland Oy, Registered Address: PL 281, 00181 Helsinki, Business Identity Code: 0357606 - 4, Domiciled in Helsinki Message-ID: <0e95e1a1-843e-38ea-c4bb-e6c48432ea7c@intel.com> Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 11:56:51 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 1/02/19 10:10 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 at 02:38, Chaotian Jing wrote: >> >> On Thu, 2019-01-31 at 16:58 +0100, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>> On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 at 08:53, Chaotian Jing wrote: >>>> >>>> mmc_hs400_to_hs200() begins with the card and host in HS400 mode. >>>> Therefore, any commands sent to the card should use HS400 timing. >>>> It is incorrect to reduce frequency to 50Mhz before sending the switch >>>> command, in this case, only reduce clock frequency to 50Mhz but without >>>> host timming change, host is still in hs400 mode but clock changed from >>>> 200Mhz to 50Mhz, which makes the tuning result unsuitable and cause >>>> the switch command gets response CRC error. >>> >>> According the eMMC spec there is no violation by decreasing the clock >>> frequency like this. We can use whatever value <=200MHz. >>> >>> However, perhaps in practice this becomes an issue, due to the tuning >>> for HS400 has been done on the "current" frequency. >>> >>> As as start, I think you need to clarify this in the changelog. >>> >> Yes, reduce clock frequency to 50Mhz is no Spec violation, but it may >> cause __mmc_switch() gets response CRC error, decreasing the clock but >> without HOST mode change, on the host side, host driver do not know >> what's operation the core layer want to do and can only set current bus >> clock to 50Mhz, without tuning parameter change, it has a chance lead to >> response CRC error. even lower clock frequency, but with the wrong >> tuning parameter setting(the setting is of hs400 tuning @200Mhz). > > Right, makes sense. > >>>> >>>> this patch refers to mmc_select_hs400(), make the reduce clock frequency >>>> after card timing change. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Chaotian Jing >>>> --- >>>> drivers/mmc/core/mmc.c | 8 ++++---- >>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/core/mmc.c >>>> index da892a5..21b811e 100644 >>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/mmc.c >>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/mmc.c >>>> @@ -1239,10 +1239,6 @@ int mmc_hs400_to_hs200(struct mmc_card *card) >>>> int err; >>>> u8 val; >>>> >>>> - /* Reduce frequency to HS */ >>>> - max_dtr = card->ext_csd.hs_max_dtr; >>>> - mmc_set_clock(host, max_dtr); >>>> - >>> >>> As far as I can tell, the reason to why we change the clock frequency >>> *before* the call to __mmc_switch() below, is probably to try to be on >>> the safe side and conform to the spec. >>> >> Agree, it Must be more safe with lower clock frequency, but the >> precondition is to make the host side recognize current timing is not >> HS400 mode. it has no method to find a safe setting to ensure no >> response CRC error when reduce clock from 200Mhz to 50Mhz. >>> However, I think you have a point, as the call to __mmc_switch(), >>> passes the "send_status" parameter as false, no other command than the >>> CMD6 is sent to the card. >>> >> yes, the send status command was sent only after __mmc_switch() done. >>>> /* Switch HS400 to HS DDR */ >>>> val = EXT_CSD_TIMING_HS; >>>> err = __mmc_switch(card, EXT_CSD_CMD_SET_NORMAL, EXT_CSD_HS_TIMING, >>>> @@ -1253,6 +1249,10 @@ int mmc_hs400_to_hs200(struct mmc_card *card) >>>> >>>> mmc_set_timing(host, MMC_TIMING_MMC_DDR52); >>>> >>>> + /* Reduce frequency to HS */ >>>> + max_dtr = card->ext_csd.hs_max_dtr; >>>> + mmc_set_clock(host, max_dtr); >>>> + >>> >>> Perhaps it's even more correct to change the clock frequency before >>> the call to mmc_set_timing(host, MMC_TIMING_MMC_DDR52). Otherwise you >>> will be using the DDR52 timing in the controller, but with a too high >>> frequency. >>> >> for Our host, it has no impact to change the clock before or after >> change timing, as the mmc_set_timing() is only for host side, not >> related to MMC card side and no commands sent do card before the >> timing/clock change completed. > > Alright. After a second thought, it actually looks more consistent > with mmc_select_hs400() to do it after, as what you propose in > $subject patch. > > So, let's keep it as is. > >>>> err = mmc_switch_status(card); >>>> if (err) >>>> goto out_err; >>>> -- >>>> 1.8.1.1.dirty >>>> >>> >>> Finally, it sounds like you are trying to fix a real problem, can you >>> please provide some more information what is happening when the >>> problem occurs at your side? >>> >> Yes, I got a problem with new kernel version. with >> commit:57da0c042f4af52614f4bd1a148155a299ae5cd8, this commit makes >> re-tuning every time when access RPMB partition. > > Okay, could you please add this as fixes tag for the next version of the patch. > >> >> in fact, our host tuning result of hs400 is very stable and almost never >> get response CRC error with clock frequency at 200Mhz. but cannot ensure >> this tuning result also suitable when running at HS400 mode @50Mhz. as I >> mentioned before, the host side does not know the reason of reduce clock >> frequency to 50Mhz at HS400 mode, so what's the host side can do is only >> reduce the bus clock to 50Mhz, even it can just only set the tuning >> setting to default when clock frequency lower than 50Mhz, but both card >> & host side are still at HS400 mode, still cannot ensure this setting is >> suitable. > > Right, thanks for clarifying. > > So I am expecting a new version with a fixes tag and some > clarification of the changelog, then I am ready to apply this to give > it some test. The switch from HS400 mode is done for tuning at times when CRC errors are a possibility e.g. after a CRC error during transfer. So if the frequency is not to be reduced, then some mitigation is needed for the possibility that the CMD6 response itself will have a CRC error.