lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Nov]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH] mmc: sdhci-omap: Workaround errata regarding SDR104/HS200 tuning failures (i929)
From
Date
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@ti.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig | 2 +
>> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-omap.c | 90 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>> 2 files changed, 91 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig b/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig
>> index 1b58739d9744..6d3553f06f27 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/Kconfig
>> @@ -969,6 +969,8 @@ config MMC_SDHCI_XENON
>> config MMC_SDHCI_OMAP
>> tristate "TI SDHCI Controller Support"
>> depends on MMC_SDHCI_PLTFM && OF
>> + select THERMAL
>> + select TI_SOC_THERMAL
>> help
>> This selects the Secure Digital Host Controller Interface (SDHCI)
>> support present in TI's DRA7 SOCs. The controller supports
>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-omap.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-omap.c
>> index b3cb39d0db6f..9ccce7ef3a60 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-omap.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-omap.c
>> @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
>> #include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
>> #include <linux/pinctrl/consumer.h>
>> #include <linux/sys_soc.h>
>> +#include <linux/thermal.h>
>>
>> #include "sdhci-pltfm.h"
>>
>> @@ -286,14 +287,18 @@ static int sdhci_omap_execute_tuning(struct mmc_host *mmc, u32 opcode)
>> struct sdhci_host *host = mmc_priv(mmc);
>> struct sdhci_pltfm_host *pltfm_host = sdhci_priv(host);
>> struct sdhci_omap_host *omap_host = sdhci_pltfm_priv(pltfm_host);
>> + struct thermal_zone_device *thermal_dev;
>> struct device *dev = omap_host->dev;
>> struct mmc_ios *ios = &mmc->ios;
>> u32 start_window = 0, max_window = 0;
>> + bool single_point_failure = false;
>> u8 cur_match, prev_match = 0;
>> u32 length = 0, max_len = 0;
>> u32 phase_delay = 0;
>> + int temperature;
>> int ret = 0;
>> u32 reg;
>> + int i;
>>
>> /* clock tuning is not needed for upto 52MHz */
>> if (ios->clock <= 52000000)
>> @@ -303,6 +308,16 @@ static int sdhci_omap_execute_tuning(struct mmc_host *mmc, u32 opcode)
>> if (ios->timing == MMC_TIMING_UHS_SDR50 && !(reg & CAPA2_TSDR50))
>> return 0;
>>
>> + thermal_dev = thermal_zone_get_zone_by_name("cpu_thermal");
>> + if (IS_ERR(thermal_dev)) {
>> + dev_err(dev, "Unable to get thermal zone for tuning\n");
>> + return PTR_ERR(thermal_dev);
>> + }
>
> 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.

Thanks,
Faiz

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-11-30 06:54    [W:0.086 / U:5.832 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site