Re: [PATCH 0/2] mmc: J7200: Add support for higher speed modes in MMCSD subsystems

[Aswath Govindraju]

Hi Nishanth,

On 25/01/21 7:21 pm, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> On 19:12-20210125, Aswath Govindraju wrote:
>> Hi Nishanth,
>>
>> On 22/01/21 11:36 pm, Nishanth Menon wrote:
>>> On 21:54-20210122, Aswath Govindraju wrote:
>>>> The following series of patches
>>>> - adds support for HS200 and HS400 speed modes in MMCSD0 subsystem
>>>> - adds support for UHS-I speed modes in MMCSD1 subsystem 
>>>>
>>>> Aswath Govindraju (2):
>>>>   arm64: dts: ti: k3-j7200-main: Add support for HS200 and HS400 modes
>>>>     in MMCSD0 subsystem
>>>>   arm64: dts: ti: k3-j7200-main: Add support for UHS-I modes in MMCSD1
>>>>     subsystem
>>>
>>>
>>> Just a curious couple of questions:
>>> Does squashing both the patches create a problem for understanding or a
>>> later bisect? I kind of thought these mostly go hand in hand between the
>>> instances, am I mistaken?
>>>
>>
>> Yes, they can be squashed. I post a respin doing this.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
>>
>>> Are there any otap delay params update needed or the defaults are good
>>> to go?
>>>
>>
>> The otap values are already up-to-date with the data sheet and don't
>> need updation.
> 
> Thanks for the clarification.
> 
>>
>>> Will also help to provide some verification log along with this.
>>>
>>
>> May I know what sort of logs would be best to provide. Would enumeration
>> logs during boot suffice ?
>>
>> Like this,
>> https://pastebin.ubuntu.com/p/v9NRV7GwMw/ ?
> 
> That just says we detected the cards, no?
> I thought we had tests around this? Something including /sys/kernel/debug/mmc*/ios
> 
> Something that demonstrates that this actually runs at the claimed
> speeds? That would be nice on linux-next, if possible as well..
> 

Yes there are tests which confirm that claimed speeds are functional. I
will add them in the respin.

Thanks,
Aswath