Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756597Ab1E1XRx (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 May 2011 19:17:53 -0400 Received: from mail-pw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:39420 "EHLO mail-pw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752364Ab1E1XRw convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 May 2011 19:17:52 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 28 May 2011 19:17:52 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC] sdhci: timeouts From: Charles Hannum To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1017 Lines: 18 On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 19:09, Charles Hannum wrote: > 4) Ultimately I found that some SDHC cards just seem to take a good > long time to respond. ?I ended up increasing the write timeout to 1s > and I've encountered 0 problems since then. ?Since this is only an > error condition, and therefore hardly of any performance concerns, I > suggest it may be a good idea to do this in general. ?See attached > patch sdhci-timeout-limit.diff BTW, I should mention that, with a TMCLK of 33000 (very common, because it's just the PCI bus clock), increasing the limit from 300000 to 1000000 us actually increases the ?counter? value by exactly 1 (from 11 to 12). This is probably why the older controller-specific hack of simply incrementing the counter worked. -- 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/