Re: [PATCH v4 6/6] Atmel MCI: Driver for Atmel on-chip MMCcontrollers

[Haavard Skinnemoen]

Pierre Ossman <drzeus-list@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I am a bit concerned about the problems with mmc_test you mentioned
> though. Have you sent any info about those previously?

No, I don't think I have.

Here are the results from one of my cards:

sh-3.2# echo > /sys/class/mmc_host/mmc0/mmc0\:b368/test 
mmc0: Starting tests of card mmc0:b368...
mmc0: Test case 1. Basic write (no data verification)...
mmc0: Result: OK
mmc0: Test case 2. Basic read (no data verification)...
mmc0: Result: OK
mmc0: Test case 3. Basic write (with data verification)...
mmc0: Result: OK
mmc0: Test case 4. Basic read (with data verification)...
mmc0: Result: OK
mmc0: Test case 5. Multi-block write...
mmc0: Warning: Host did not wait for busy state to end.
mmc0: Result: OK
mmc0: Test case 6. Multi-block read...
mmc0: Result: OK
mmc0: Test case 7. Power of two block writes...
mmc0: Result: UNSUPPORTED (by card)
mmc0: Test case 8. Power of two block reads...
mmc0: Result: OK
mmc0: Test case 9. Weird sized block writes...
mmc0: Result: UNSUPPORTED (by card)
mmc0: Test case 10. Weird sized block reads...
mmc0: Result: OK
mmc0: Test case 11. Badly aligned write...
mmc0: Result: OK
mmc0: Test case 12. Badly aligned read...
mmc0: Result: OK
mmc0: Test case 13. Badly aligned multi-block write...
mmc0: Warning: Host did not wait for busy state to end.
mmc0: Warning: Host did not wait for busy state to end.
mmc0: Result: OK
mmc0: Test case 14. Badly aligned multi-block read...
mmc0: Result: OK
mmc0: Test case 15. Correct xfer_size at write (start failure)...
mmc0: Result: ERROR (-84)
mmc0: Test case 16. Correct xfer_size at read (start failure)...
mmc0: Result: OK
mmc0: Test case 17. Correct xfer_size at write (midway failure)...
mmc0: Result: ERROR (-84)
mmc0: Test case 18. Correct xfer_size at read (midway failure)...
mmc0: Result: OK
mmc0: Tests completed.

Tests 7 and 9 are not supported by the card, so I can't do much about
it except go through all the cards I have available and see if one of
them supports this test.

Tests 15 and 17 return -EILSEQ instead of -ETIMEDOUT. The at91_mci
driver has the same problem, and I think it's a hardware issue -- the
controller wrongly flags a CRC error instead of a data timeout error
if the card doesn't respond with any CRC status after a write. I don't
know how to work around that problem.

Of course, I could cheat and return -ETIMEDOUT on CRC errors. That
would make the driver pass the tests, right? ;-)

The test results are the same regardless of whether DMA is used or not,
but short and/or difficult transfers are always done in PIO mode.

Haavard
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/