Received: by 2002:a25:c205:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id s5csp3836235ybf; Tue, 3 Mar 2020 13:52:50 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vuZkEgZAtBIVprew93SCnwEMXO7JRNsiX0KFb6ZcIenbmolvtj78Af9oqha05yY0LlWoE56 X-Received: by 2002:a9d:10d:: with SMTP id 13mr4523032otu.334.1583272370228; Tue, 03 Mar 2020 13:52:50 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1583272370; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=R3l55G6HqVSeXLglCML9g6RljALfLHXWtA+fOqyLkipI5kezMQLaaCpp42Q72So10g 7C/t2r5vsfLxOaSUoHhIFDNYKJO9bitrq6wN2YRmN0VWh67aaNW+IfAzliXgcX5QLG2h CAs3gmHLvIYM/5NlzFK3tp7sKbjJHLDtxmxhD/yWhwQMjTx2FhNppIHgQQPmNgsCbdK+ DFHOLzUJ+JFxAkxtFfreLwWLygtBUb5b4l6i2rwuDpmjjY/qY/5SHqwhLmYKLOxXcVkB ThHb/0aSRhdbzExxWbd3FzCe5jvcYDL/g/ClojJng8nmJ46+TrQuAd5Hevi99uadLJne 9ZhQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=ymqoP/ndX/9mJ+CBpiEkMuPr3Hb5TQeTUbKPX3cVHZI=; b=Ebdi64rOFKvpExfLINqaqmtjp39xSIr2RcD151H2czzYfQSnkJKXztn5NlcVJYUQCt gs6SQDxUWO2qx2dglMNRTOylTBn1sT1tqOO12JjnioZqdc0tuAcHVy6dKkcwWr1peZhj R3kQEyIFzNL93lj1j5XmdE0wBy+k8Q7f4zaXwtDT8GW/jX+8JZaRw9gscGNYcM+vQFXE drSjVfDKlA6P+xjAZ69MTuTDW8+yDRnN1XYN8u+brDpt85bpl6Frmce10xU0tCD/51QZ XHjRw6+ZZyLOqorBl8KVqFIdTZhYYGi2Q8j6px8YhWfVTeMpUCWAhkhS59v71PtPnJB2 dsNg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@linaro.org header.s=google header.b=q6ErthXf; 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=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=linaro.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id u6si5305661otg.73.2020.03.03.13.52.38; Tue, 03 Mar 2020 13:52:50 -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; dkim=pass header.i=@linaro.org header.s=google header.b=q6ErthXf; 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=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=linaro.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732726AbgCCVgo (ORCPT + 99 others); Tue, 3 Mar 2020 16:36:44 -0500 Received: from mail-vs1-f67.google.com ([209.85.217.67]:35434 "EHLO mail-vs1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731027AbgCCVgo (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Mar 2020 16:36:44 -0500 Received: by mail-vs1-f67.google.com with SMTP id u26so3473129vsg.2 for ; Tue, 03 Mar 2020 13:36:42 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ymqoP/ndX/9mJ+CBpiEkMuPr3Hb5TQeTUbKPX3cVHZI=; b=q6ErthXf1GgYGgZ3C2Q/uIXRPwS5His4PldwJJeIf/wXLTyWCCgIn7BgRhyjB6iHoN FGM2AlJc6KMLQp9UNnZFH5vswC1+Tnsey3pt72wZ4Bt8jfGQJAAMZJymQTJfo2HT4Ggn SOc8C+R5+bbxXnCPKUyT/TFWebPQz2TIUnpA+UwSdtibqm4xzt88e+L+hfSau3ebXmNr eo6VQZhZRZlm/veAqrvDhnuCkQ9m07yCdZ8eWaSXIQQDMha4hFSrjWirR3H9qyJjN7mD XmI2EuGoPMQIWacCsHkWRfXE8Z1vN0SqibhnaM4JKsGVenFb9Y5dcAA4Ql2af0nHGm/J qpAQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ymqoP/ndX/9mJ+CBpiEkMuPr3Hb5TQeTUbKPX3cVHZI=; b=JuKPOxGiiJXkkOV0piRaBqBanQmROxwc6h3yLfMWx/6lInd9ugXnDfAbsKSJUfvRUA jaoN+XlHpw7+t6lpKztQU2zu3OpNfrJObq4yC1GUVye4xqqe/Pi3v1vTBmIN5uuJlEXE DME099vyPS6tHBe4SL9do+Uqzmz37WOqF0RdmSSWiZC1m50fvEqmTA4+erFOik3D33lR /NA3JUnj8ieRNsc5o91qkxOHZ8qmgkQkW6cNjjrhAwVMqdyms0P5y92Tu0TM8/sX73NA UJ3mLtpkesCTjpj1gaou1/XN8evgPKsCS3j9IBgt8rdifpePXHVJnmuOP6z+ZC9LMRE2 g2pA== X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ1SnT/0EuSgKbhI0dn3n7Nb+brIOGsg4xRXiDi2MDQ9TFRPJrpw wp5KQWL2OIXrKXDvl81cZGCQZpCiiTnb3uxIE0wewCIBNvA= X-Received: by 2002:a67:800e:: with SMTP id b14mr2493925vsd.191.1583271388590; Tue, 03 Mar 2020 13:36:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <6523119a-50ac-973a-d1cd-ab1569259411@nvidia.com> <0963b60f-15e7-4bc6-10df-6fc8003e4d42@nvidia.com> <34fd84d7-387b-b6f3-7fb3-aa490909e205@ti.com> In-Reply-To: From: Ulf Hansson Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2020 22:35:50 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: LKFT: arm x15: mmc1: cache flush error -110 To: Faiz Abbas Cc: Jon Hunter , Bitan Biswas , Sowjanya Komatineni , Adrian Hunter , Naresh Kamboju , Jens Axboe , Alexei Starovoitov , linux-block , lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org, open list , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" , Arnd Bergmann , John Stultz , Thierry Reding , Anders Roxell , Kishon Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 17:50, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 at 14:11, Faiz Abbas wrote: > > > > Uffe, > > > > On 26/02/20 8:51 pm, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > > + Anders, Kishon > > > > > > On Tue, 25 Feb 2020 at 17:24, Jon Hunter wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> On 25/02/2020 14:26, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > >> > > >> ... > > >> > > >>> However, from the core point of view, the response is still requested, > > >>> only that we don't want the driver to wait for the card to stop > > >>> signaling busy. Instead we want to deal with that via "polling" from > > >>> the core. > > >>> > > >>> This is a rather worrying behaviour, as it seems like the host driver > > >>> doesn't really follow this expectations from the core point of view. > > >>> And mmc_flush_cache() is not the only case, as we have erase, bkops, > > >>> sanitize, etc. Are all these working or not really well tested? > > >> > > >> I don't believe that they are well tested. We have a simple test to > > >> mount an eMMC partition, create a file, check the contents, remove the > > >> file and unmount. The timeouts always occur during unmounting. > > >> > > >>> Earlier, before my three patches, if the provided timeout_ms parameter > > >>> to __mmc_switch() was zero, which was the case for > > >>> mmc_mmc_flush_cache() - this lead to that __mmc_switch() simply > > >>> ignored validating host->max_busy_timeout, which was wrong. In any > > >>> case, this also meant that an R1B response was always used for > > >>> mmc_flush_cache(), as you also indicated above. Perhaps this is the > > >>> critical part where things can go wrong. > > >>> > > >>> BTW, have you tried erase commands for sdhci tegra driver? If those > > >>> are working fine, do you have any special treatments for these? > > >> > > >> That I am not sure, but I will check. > > > > > > Great, thanks. Looking forward to your report. > > > > > > So, from my side, me and Anders Roxell, have been collaborating on > > > testing the behaviour on a TI Beagleboard x15 (remotely with limited > > > debug options), which is using the sdhci-omap variant. I am trying to > > > get hold of an Nvidia jetson-TX2, but not found one yet. These are the > > > conclusions from the observed behaviour on the Beagleboard for the > > > CMD6 cache flush command. > > > > > > First, the reported host->max_busy_timeout is 2581 (ms) for the > > > sdhci-omap driver in this configuration. > > > > > > 1. As we all know by now, the cache flush command (CMD6) fails with > > > -110 currently. This is when MMC_CACHE_FLUSH_TIMEOUT_MS is set to 30 * > > > 1000 (30s), which means __mmc_switch() drops the MMC_RSP_BUSY flag > > > from the command. > > > > > > 2. Changing the MMC_CACHE_FLUSH_TIMEOUT_MS to 2000 (2s), means that > > > the MMC_RSP_BUSY flag becomes set by __mmc_switch, because of the > > > timeout_ms parameter is less than max_busy_timeout (2000 < 2581). > > > Then everything works fine. > > > > > > 3. Updating the code to again use 30s as the > > > MMC_CACHE_FLUSH_TIMEOUT_MS, but instead forcing the MMC_RSP_BUSY to be > > > set, even when the timeout_ms becomes greater than max_busy_timeout. > > > This also works fine. > > > > > > Clearly this indicates a problem that I think needs to be addressed in > > > the sdhci driver. However, of course I can revert the three discussed > > > patches to fix the problem, but that would only hide the issues and I > > > am sure we would then get back to this issue, sooner or later. > > > > > > To fix the problem in the sdhci driver, I would appreciate if someone > > > from TI and Nvidia can step in to help, as I don't have the HW on my > > > desk. > > > > > > Comments or other ideas of how to move forward? > > > > > > > Sorry I missed this earlier. > > > > I don't have an X15 with me here but I'm trying to set one up in our > > remote farm. In the meantime, I tried to reproduce this issue on two > > platforms (dra72-evm and am57xx-evm) and wasn't able to see the issue > > because those eMMC's don't even have a cache. I will keep you updated > > when I do get a board with a eMMC that has a cache. > > > > Is there a way to reproduce this CMD6 issue with another operation? > > Yes, most definitely. > > Let me cook a debug patch for you that should trigger the problem for > another CMD6 operation. I will post something later this evening or in > the mornings (Swedish timezone). A bit later than promised, I am clearly an optimist. In any case here's the patch I had in mind to trigger the problem for other CMD6 operations. Please give at shot and see what happens. ------- From: Ulf Hansson Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2020 22:11:05 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] mmc: core: DEBUG: Force a long timeout for all CMD6 This is to test sdhci-omap, for example, to see what happens when using a longer timeout. My guess is that it triggers __mmc_switch() to disable the MMC_RSP_BUSY flag for the command. If so, it likely to make the host driver to fail, in some way or the other. Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson --- drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c | 8 +++++++- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c b/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c index da425ee2d9bf..f0d2563961f6 100644 --- a/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/mmc_ops.c @@ -532,6 +532,9 @@ int __mmc_switch(struct mmc_card *card, u8 set, u8 index, u8 value, mmc_retune_hold(host); + /* Force a long timeout to likely make use_r1b_resp to become false. */ + timeout_ms = MMC_CACHE_FLUSH_TIMEOUT_MS; + if (!timeout_ms) { pr_warn("%s: unspecified timeout for CMD6 - use generic\n", mmc_hostname(host)); @@ -544,8 +547,11 @@ int __mmc_switch(struct mmc_card *card, u8 set, u8 index, u8 value, * the host to avoid HW busy detection, by converting to a R1 response * instead of a R1B. */ - if (host->max_busy_timeout && (timeout_ms > host->max_busy_timeout)) + if (host->max_busy_timeout && (timeout_ms > host->max_busy_timeout)) { + pr_warn("%s:Disable MMC_RSP_BUSY. timeout_ms(%u) > max_busy_timeout(%u)\n", + mmc_hostname(host), timeout_ms, host->max_busy_timeout); use_r1b_resp = false; + } cmd.opcode = MMC_SWITCH; cmd.arg = (MMC_SWITCH_MODE_WRITE_BYTE << 24) | -- Kind regards Uffe