Re: [PATCH resend] sdhci: work around broken dma boundary behaviour

2011-03-14 Thread Wolfram Sang
> > > intmask) > > >* boundaries, but as we can't disable the feature > > > * we need to at least restart the transfer. > > > */ > > > - if (intmask & SDHCI_INT_DMA_END) > > > - sdhci_writel(host, sdhci_readl(host, SDHCI_DMA_ADDRESS), > > > -

Re: [PATCH resend] sdhci: work around broken dma boundary behaviour

2011-03-14 Thread Mikko Vinni
Hi, > Then we'll have a "useless" update. Won't hurt AFAICS, but might > surprise people examining the debug output. Ok. > > I only compile tested this so far, so no proper patch yet, but what I would > > write based on the comments is something like this: > > (Sidenote: Indentation is bro

Re: [PATCH resend] sdhci: work around broken dma boundary behaviour

2011-03-14 Thread Wolfram Sang
> > I was just referring to using "" instead of "@". The provider > > doesn't really matter :) > > Ah, ok. Yahoo makes it practically impossible to send well-formed > patches from the web interface, but as long as it's not completely > rejected for casual email, I prefer to keep the number of s

Re: [PATCH resend] sdhci: work around broken dma boundary behaviour

2011-03-14 Thread Mikko Vinni
Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > Signed-off-by: Mikko Vinni yahoo.com> > > > > > > Proper EMail please. > > > > Hm, @gmail.com? (cc added for further emails) > > I was just referring to using "" instead of "@". The provider > doesn't really matter :) Ah, ok. Yahoo makes it practically impossi

Re: [PATCH resend] sdhci: work around broken dma boundary behaviour

2011-03-14 Thread Wolfram Sang
> > But we can't guarantee that. Transfer could be up to 65535 * 2K. > > In sdhci.c function sdhci_prepare_data there are these checks: > > /* Sanity checks */ > BUG_ON(data->blksz * data->blocks > 524288); > BUG_ON(data->blksz > host->mmc->max_blk_size); > BUG_ON(data->blocks >

Re: [PATCH resend] sdhci: work around broken dma boundary behaviour

2011-03-14 Thread Mikko Vinni
Hi, Wolfram Sang wrote: > I finally found some time. Greatly appreciated. > > Some SD host controllers (noticed on an integrated JMicron SD reader > > on an HP Pavilion dv5-1250eo laptop) don't update the dma address > > register before signaling a dma interrupt due to a dma boundary. > > D

Re: [PATCH resend] sdhci: work around broken dma boundary behaviour

2011-03-12 Thread Wolfram Sang
Hi, I finally found some time. On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 10:40:57PM +0200, Mikko Vinni wrote: > Some SD host controllers (noticed on an integrated JMicron SD reader > on an HP Pavilion dv5-1250eo laptop) don't update the dma address > register before signaling a dma interrupt due to a dma boundary.

Re: [PATCH resend] sdhci: work around broken dma boundary behaviour

2011-03-08 Thread Wolfram Sang
> Thanks, I agree, pushed to -next for testing. I'd still appreciate > a Reviewed-by: from someone on linux-mmc@, and would like to hear > if anyone thinks this needs to be a quirk rather than a generic fix. Not surprisingly, I prefer the generic fix over a quirk ;) It seems to not cost much dete

Re: [PATCH resend] sdhci: work around broken dma boundary behaviour

2011-03-08 Thread Chris Ball
Hi Mikko, On Mon, Mar 07 2011, Mikko Vinni wrote: > Some SD host controllers (noticed on an integrated JMicron SD reader > on an HP Pavilion dv5-1250eo laptop) don't update the dma address > register before signaling a dma interrupt due to a dma boundary. > Detect this and update the register to t

[PATCH resend] sdhci: work around broken dma boundary behaviour

2011-03-07 Thread Mikko Vinni
Some SD host controllers (noticed on an integrated JMicron SD reader on an HP Pavilion dv5-1250eo laptop) don't update the dma address register before signaling a dma interrupt due to a dma boundary. Detect this and update the register to the next 512KB boundary, at which the transfer presumably st