Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-omap: Workaround errata regarding SDR104/HS200 tuning failures (i929)

[Faiz Abbas]

Hi,

On 10/12/18 10:26 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 17:43, Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@xxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 10/12/18 8:55 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>> On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 15:04, Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@xxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On 10/12/18 7:15 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 10 Dec 2018 at 14:23, Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@xxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Uffe,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 05/12/18 7:20 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 at 06:53, Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@xxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Kishon,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 30/11/18 10:10 AM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Faiz,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 30/11/18 12:35 AM, Faiz Abbas wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Errata i929 in certain OMAP5/DRA7XX/AM57XX silicon revisions
>>>>>>>>>> (SPRZ426D - November 2014 - Revised February 2018 [1]) mentions
>>>>>>>>>> unexpected tuning pattern errors. A small failure band may be present
>>>>>>>>>> in the tuning range which may be missed by the current algorithm.
>>>>>>>>>> Furthermore, the failure bands vary with temperature leading to
>>>>>>>>>> different optimum tuning values for different temperatures.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As suggested in the related Application Report (SPRACA9B - October 2017
>>>>>>>>>> - Revised July 2018 [2]), tuning should be done in two stages.
>>>>>>>>>> In stage 1, assign the optimum ratio in the maximum pass window for the
>>>>>>>>>> current temperature. In stage 2, if the chosen value is close to the
>>>>>>>>>> small failure band, move away from it in the appropriate direction.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> References:
>>>>>>>>>> [1] http://www.ti.com/lit/pdf/sprz426
>>>>>>>>>> [2] http://www.ti.com/lit/pdf/SPRACA9
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Faiz Abbas <faiz_abbas@xxxxxx>
>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>> ...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Can't we get thermal zone once during probe?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Tuning is also (ideally) supposed to happen only once per enumeration.
>>>>>>>> Also it doesn't make sense to get a thermal zone for lower speed systems
>>>>>>>> that won't do tuning.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Currently sdhci-omap calls pm_runtime_get_sync() during probe, and
>>>>>>> then keeps the host device runtime resumed until ->remove() is called
>>>>>>> on it. I assume you are going to change that, at some point!?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In other words, what will happen to the host device when it becomes
>>>>>>> runtime suspended? Is re-tuning needed when it gets runtime resumed,
>>>>>>> which is the case for many other sdhci variants?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are no plans to support runtime_suspend()/resume() any time in the
>>>>>> near future. If its ok with you, I would like to get this patch in
>>>>>> without any changes. We can change it in case a need for
>>>>>> runtime_suspend()/_resume() does arise.
>>>>>
>>>>> Right, I am okay with that. Due to recent changes to sdhci-omap
>>>>> $subject patch doesn't apply, can you please rebase!?
>>>>>
>>>>> Additionally, I realized that we should fold in patch updating the DT
>>>>> doc for sdhci-omap, adding the property for the thermal zone. I
>>>>> regards to that, I am wondering if "cpu_thermal", is really the
>>>>> correct name of the zone. The point is, I am guessing the zone could
>>>>> change along with the SoCs/platforms.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> As you have probably noticed, we are introducing a new driver
>>>> (sdhci_am654) for newer platforms. I don't foresee using sdhci-omap
>>>> driver with any other platforms. In case we do use it, we can add the dt
>>>> property at that point of time and default to "cpu_thermal" to maintain
>>>> dt compatibility.
>>>>
>>>> Will rebase and send v2 if you are ok with above.
>>>
>>> I see, but you still need to update the DT doc for sdhci-omap.
>>>
>>
>> I didn't get you. There are no changes in dt. What changes should I
>> document?
> 
> Well, you are fetching a thermal zone using a specific name. It's
> quite similar to how we document other resources (pinctrls for
> example) that sdhci omap depends on, so that needs to be document too.
> 

Ok. Will add a note for "cpu_thermal" in the documentation.

Thanks,
Faiz