On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 01:30:09PM -0700, Steve Rae wrote: > Hi Stefan, > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 8:00 AM, Stefan Roese <s...@denx.de> wrote: > > Hi Steve, > > > > On 27.06.2016 23:43, Steve Rae wrote: > >> > >> Otherwise, ocassionally see errors like this: > >> Flashing sparse image at offset 2078720 > >> Flashing Sparse Image > >> sdhci_send_command: Timeout for status update! > >> mmc fail to send stop cmd > >> write_sparse_image: Write failed, block #2181088 [0] > >> > >> This does not affect the actual writing speed, which is controlled by > >> the default value: > >> CONFIG_SDHCI_CMD_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT > >> > >> It only increases the retries when reading: > >> SDHCI_INT_STATUS > >> to avoid the timeout error. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Steve Rae <steve....@raedomain.com> > >> --- > >> as per the discussion in: > >> http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/2016-June/258966.html > >> this supercedes: > >> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/615994/ > > > > > > IIRC, I've suggested to move SDHCI_CMD_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT to Kconfig > > and use the old value as default value. So that you can overwrite > > it for your board / platform via your defconfig. But I have no > > strong feelings here - your current version also works for > > me and does not "clutter" the Kconfig subsystem with too many > > values. So: > > > > Reviewed-by: Stefan Roese <s...@denx.de> > > > > Thanks, > > Stefan > > > > Thanks for the review... > I didn't want to touch the "performance" algorithm related to > SDHCI_CMD_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT (which maybe should be in Kconfig). > However, the retry loop related to SDHCI_READ_STATUS_TIMEOUT doesn't need to > be in Kconfig -- it is just a define.
... so how is this handled in the kernel? I'm assuming some DT property.. -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
