Re: [PATCH V1 2/4] mmc: sdhci-msm: Enable MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY host capability

[Veerabhadrarao Badiganti]

Hi Ulf,

On 4/16/2020 5:46 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Apr 2020 at 17:54, Veerabhadrarao Badiganti
> <vbadigan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > sdhci-msm controller requires the R1B response for commands that
> > has this response associated with them.
> >
> > So enable MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY capability.
> I assume this potentially should be considered as fix and tagged for stable?
Yes Stable flag can be applied to this.

Patch with MMC_CAP_WAIT_WHILE_BUSY cap also needed besides this.
Shall I push V2 with stable flag?

> Another question, if there is there an upper limit of the busy timeout
> in the HW (cmd->busy_timeout) or does the driver use a software
> timeout that is adjustable?

The max supported h.w busy timeout value on qcom h/w 21sec.

> Kind regards
> Uffe
>
> > Signed-off-by: Veerabhadrarao Badiganti <vbadigan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c | 1 +
> >   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
> > index 013dcea..d826e9b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-msm.c
> > @@ -2088,6 +2088,7 @@ static int sdhci_msm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >          }
> >
> >          msm_host->mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_WAIT_WHILE_BUSY;
> > +       msm_host->mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY;
> >
> >          pm_runtime_get_noresume(&pdev->dev);
> >          pm_runtime_set_active(&pdev->dev);
> > --
> > Qualcomm India Private Limited, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc., is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project