Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758373AbYFIGEf (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jun 2008 02:04:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751978AbYFIGE0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jun 2008 02:04:26 -0400 Received: from 202.54.90.7.ill-bgl.static.vsnl.net.in ([202.54.90.7]:36395 "HELO 202.54.90.7.ill-bgl.static.vsnl.net.in" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751743AbYFIGEZ convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Jun 2008 02:04:25 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 21422 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Mon, 09 Jun 2008 02:04:24 EDT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Subject: RE: mmc_test : some results Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2008 05:51:52 +0530 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Message-ID: <5BF78BCE8D9BF14A83F836BD9E3916BA0DDFC3@blrms.slti.sanyo.co.in> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: mmc_test : some results Thread-Index: AcjH7WV3VtVQWbJ0T7eJ2eWYrn02CgCW4TOw References: <48495843.1050902@atmel.com> From: "Gururaja Hebbar K R" To: "Nicolas Ferre" , "Pierre Ossman" , "ARM Linux Mailing List" , "Linux Kernel list" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2359 Lines: 74 Hi Nicolas, Could you please be kind enough to share the test program so that we can test mmc driver on other platforms. i have a customized arm9 versatile board with mmci controller and would like to test the same TIA, Regards Gururaja -----Original Message----- From: linux-arm-kernel-bounces@lists.arm.linux.org.uk [mailto:linux-arm-kernel-bounces@lists.arm.linux.org.uk] On Behalf Of Nicolas Ferre Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 8:31 AM To: Pierre Ossman; ARM Linux Mailing List; Linux Kernel list Subject: mmc_test : some results Hi Pierre, Here are the results of a mmc_test run played on at91_mci after applying this patch series : http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/5/30/201 I skipped some of the tests just to concentrate on those ones. Can you tell me if the test is correct : are the errors reported for the xfer_size tests the normal behavior (I assume yes because a failure is simulated) ? ~ # echo 1 > /sys/class/mmc_host/mmc0/mmc0\:e624/test mmc0: Starting tests of card mmc0:e624... mmc0: Test case 1. Basic write (no data verification)... mmc0: Result: OK mmc0: Test case 2. Basic read (no data verification)... mmc0: Result: OK mmc0: Test case 3. Basic write (with data verification)... mmc0: Result: OK mmc0: Test case 4. Basic read (with data verification)... mmc0: Result: OK mmc0: Test case 5. Multi-block write... mmc0: Result: OK mmc0: Test case 6. Multi-block read... mmc0: Result: OK mmc0: Test case 7. Correct xfer_size at write (start failure)... mmc0: Result: ERROR (-84) mmc0: Test case 8. Correct xfer_size at read (start failure)... mmc0: Result: ERROR (-110) mmc0: Test case 9. Correct xfer_size at write (midway failure)... mmc0: Result: ERROR (-84) mmc0: Test case 10. Correct xfer_size at read (midway failure)... mmc0: Result: ERROR (-110) mmc0: Tests completed. ~ # Thanks, regards, -- Nicolas Ferre ------------------------------------------------------------------- List admin: http://lists.arm.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel FAQ: http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/mailinglists/faq.php Etiquette: http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/mailinglists/etiquette.php -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/