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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Fix issues with command queuing in arasan controllers
To:     Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>
CC:     <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>, <shawn.lin@rock-chips.com>
References: <20191230092343.30692-1-faiz_abbas@ti.com>
 <837996b2-c69f-1446-fda4-5577e28ba8e1@ti.com>
 <a1b75d07-17ab-5dec-aa40-b9cff247eabf@intel.com>
 <b2600fd2-bcc9-19f6-8bf8-f3bb51da089f@ti.com>
 <9c74c1b9-8ae4-49be-68e3-8e827d07cc66@intel.com>
From:   Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@ti.com>
Message-ID: <b34a07a7-8814-f1dd-3a90-5009af6b9eeb@ti.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Jan 2020 17:34:34 +0530
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.2.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <9c74c1b9-8ae4-49be-68e3-8e827d07cc66@intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Adrian,

On 08/01/20 5:29 pm, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 8/01/20 1:49 pm, Faiz Abbas wrote:
>> Adrian,
>>
>> On 08/01/20 5:12 pm, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>>> On 8/01/20 1:30 pm, Faiz Abbas wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On 30/12/19 2:53 pm, Faiz Abbas wrote:
>>>>> In some Arasan SDHCI controllers, after tuning, the tuning pattern data
>>>>> is leftover in the sdhci buffer. This leads to issues with future data
>>>>> commands, especially when command queuing is enabled. The following
>>>>> patches help fix this issue by resetting data lines after tuning is
>>>>> finished. The first two patches have been tested with TI's am65x and
>>>>> j721e SoCs using the sdhci_am654 driver.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a strong suspicion that this is the same issue with
>>>>> the sdhci-of-arasan driver where they are forced to dump data from the
>>>>> buffer before enabling command queuing. I need help from someone with a
>>>>> compatible platform to test this.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I had some discussions with our hardware team and they say we should be
>>>> asserting both SRC and SRD reset after tuning to start from a clean
>>>> state. Will update the patches to do that in v2.
>>>
>>> Can you use the ->execute_tuning() for that instead of a quirk?
>>>
>>
>> ->platform_execute_tuning() is called before __sdhci_execute_tuning(). I
>> need this to be done after that. Should I add a post_tuning() callback?
> 
> I meant hook host->mmc_host_ops.execute_tuning and call
> sdhci_execute_tuning() and then sdhci_reset(), like in intel_execute_tuning().
> 

Ok. Makes sense.

Thanks,
Faiz