Re: [PATCH] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC

2011-11-04 Thread Per Forlin
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 12:25 AM, Sebastian Rasmussen seb...@gmail.com wrote: Hi! Well, you kind of need both. Periodical check is a complement, not a replacement. Then we are indeed in agreement. Must BKOPS always be deferred until performance is impacted? No, of course not. As you say

Re: [PATCH] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC

2011-10-28 Thread Jaehoon Chung
Hi Sebastian. On 10/28/2011 04:26 AM, Sebastian Rasmussen wrote: Background operation(BKOPS) is one of eMMC's features. If set the URGENT_BKOPS in response, we can notify that card nedd the BKOPS. And all I/O request is done, then run background operation. If request read/write operation

Re: [PATCH] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC

2011-10-28 Thread Jaehoon Chung
Hi Sebastian. I have some question.. Maybe i think that my-patch should be worked only level-2/3..right? Because URGENT_BKOPS bit in the EXCEPTION_EVENTS_STATUS is set whenever is either 2 or 3. In this case, host control with R1-type response. But in level-0/1 case, need to check BKOPS_STATUS

Re: [PATCH] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC

2011-10-28 Thread Sebastian Rasmussen
Maybe i think that my-patch should be worked only level-2/3..right? Because URGENT_BKOPS bit in the EXCEPTION_EVENTS_STATUS is set whenever is either 2 or 3. In this case, host control with R1-type response. For 4.41 your patch is fine. For 4.5 I think it starts BKOPS too often. For 4.5

Re: [PATCH] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC

2011-10-28 Thread S, Venkatraman
On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 8:12 PM, Sebastian Rasmussen seb...@gmail.com wrote: Maybe i think that my-patch should be worked only level-2/3..right? Because URGENT_BKOPS bit in the EXCEPTION_EVENTS_STATUS is set whenever is either 2 or 3. In this case, host control with R1-type response. For

RE: [PATCH] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC

2011-10-27 Thread Dong, Chuanxiao
-Original Message- From: linux-mmc-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-mmc-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Jaehoon Chung Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 7:10 PM To: linux-mmc Cc: Chris Ball; Kyungmin Park; Hanumath Prasad Subject: [PATCH] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC

Re: [PATCH] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC

2011-10-27 Thread Kyungmin Park
Hi, On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 8:37 PM, Dong, Chuanxiao chuanxiao.d...@intel.com wrote: -Original Message- From: linux-mmc-ow...@vger.kernel.org [mailto:linux-mmc-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Jaehoon Chung Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2011 7:10 PM To: linux-mmc Cc: Chris Ball;

Re: [PATCH] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC

2011-10-27 Thread Per Forlin
Jaehoon Chung jh80.chung at samsung.com writes: +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c @@ -238,6 +238,50 @@ mmc_start_request(struct mmc_host *host, struct mmc_request *mrq) host-ops-request(host, mrq); } +/** + * mmc_start_bkops - start BKOPS for supported cards + * @card: MMC card to

Re: [PATCH] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC

2011-10-27 Thread Sebastian Rasmussen
@@ -68,6 +68,7 @@ static int mmc_queue_thread(void *d) set_current_state(TASK_RUNNING); break; } + mmc_start_bkops(mq-card); up(mq-thread_sem);

Re: [PATCH] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC

2011-10-27 Thread Sebastian Rasmussen
Just found this bit is one time programmable, so that is to say this bit is not suitable for driver to change. You mean require the BKOPS_EN_FORCE config if user want to use at kernel? What do you refer to when you write BKOPS_EN_FORCE config? It doesn't seem like the OPs patch contains such

Re: [PATCH] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC

2011-10-27 Thread Sebastian Rasmussen
Hi! This patch only starts BKOPS if it's urgent or critical. Almost, it starts BKOPS when it is urgent, which per spec means level 2 or 3, i.e. when performance is impacted or when it is critical. Better use the specs terminology as far as possible to relieve everyone of confusion. I would be

Re: [PATCH] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC

2011-10-27 Thread Per Forlin
Hi Sebastian, On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 10:51 PM, Sebastian Rasmussen seb...@gmail.com wrote: Hi! This patch only starts BKOPS if it's urgent or critical. Almost, it starts BKOPS when it is urgent, which per spec means level 2 or 3, i.e. when performance is impacted or when it is critical.

Re: [PATCH] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC

2011-10-27 Thread Sebastian Rasmussen
Hi! Well, you kind of need both. Periodical check is a complement, not a replacement. Then we are indeed in agreement. Must BKOPS always be deferred until performance is impacted? No, of course not. As you say doing BKOPS too late is not good, but also doing them too often is probably not

RE: [PATCH] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC

2011-10-27 Thread Dong, Chuanxiao
-Original Message- From: Sebastian Rasmussen [mailto:seb...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 4:31 AM To: Dong, Chuanxiao Cc: Jaehoon Chung; linux-mmc; Chris Ball; Kyungmin Park; Hanumath Prasad Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC @@ -68,6 +68,7

Re: [PATCH] mmc: support BKOPS feature for eMMC

2011-10-27 Thread Jaehoon Chung
On 10/28/2011 04:35 AM, Per Forlin wrote: Jaehoon Chung jh80.chung at samsung.com writes: +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c @@ -238,6 +238,50 @@ mmc_start_request(struct mmc_host *host, struct mmc_request *mrq) host-ops-request(host, mrq); } +/** + * mmc_start_bkops - start BKOPS