Re: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-omap: Disable MMC_CAP_AGGRESSIVE_PM for eMMC/SD

[Tony Lindgren]

* Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> [250317 10:51]:
> On Sun, 16 Mar 2025 at 21:54, Robert Nelson <robertcnelson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 7:17 AM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > We have received reports about cards can become corrupt related to the
> > > aggressive PM support. Let's make a partial revert of the change that
> > > enabled the feature.
> > >
> > > Reported-by: David Owens <daowens01@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Reported-by: Romain Naour <romain.naour@xxxxxxxx>
> > > Reported-by: Robert Nelson <robertcnelson@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Tested-by: Robert Nelson <robertcnelson@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Fixes: 3edf588e7fe0 ("mmc: sdhci-omap: Allow SDIO card power off and enable aggressive PM")
> > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-omap.c | 4 ++--
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-omap.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-omap.c
> > > index 54d795205fb4..26a9a8b5682a 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-omap.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-omap.c
> > > @@ -1339,8 +1339,8 @@ static int sdhci_omap_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > >         /* R1B responses is required to properly manage HW busy detection. */
> > >         mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_NEED_RSP_BUSY;
> > >
> > > -       /* Allow card power off and runtime PM for eMMC/SD card devices */
> > > -       mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_POWER_OFF_CARD | MMC_CAP_AGGRESSIVE_PM;
> > > +       /*  Enable SDIO card power off. */
> > > +       mmc->caps |= MMC_CAP_POWER_OFF_CARD;
> > >
> > >         ret = sdhci_setup_host(host);
> > >         if (ret)
> > > --
> > > 2.43.0
> > >
> >
> > Thanks Ulf, i also have this exact revert running on the target in our
> > ci farm, i think we should be good.  But I'll validate it in 4 weeks!
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > --
> > Robert Nelson
> > https://rcn-ee.com/
> 
> Thanks Robert for helping out!
> 
> In the meantime I decided to queue this up for next, to allow it to
> get more testing in linux-next.

Thanks looks good to me too.

Regards,

Tony