Hi On 07/27/2016 01:10 AM, Steve Rae wrote: > HI Lukasz, > > On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 2:13 AM, Lukasz Majewski <l.majew...@samsung.com> > wrote: >> Hi Steve, >> >>> with this change, I can also set the following back to 100: >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/sdhci.c b/drivers/mmc/sdhci.c >>> index de8d8ea..d593dc6 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/mmc/sdhci.c >>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/sdhci.c >>> @@ -128,7 +128,7 @@ static int sdhci_transfer_data(struct sdhci_host >>> *host, struct mmc_data *data, >>> #define CONFIG_SDHCI_CMD_MAX_TIMEOUT 3200 >>> #endif >>> #define CONFIG_SDHCI_CMD_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT 100 >>> -#define SDHCI_READ_STATUS_TIMEOUT 1000 >>> +#define SDHCI_READ_STATUS_TIMEOUT 100 >>> >>> #ifdef CONFIG_DM_MMC_OPS >>> static int sdhci_send_command(struct udevice *dev, struct mmc_cmd >>> *cmd, >>> >>> And it still works on my board ! Thanks ! >> >> Could you prepare proper revert patch? >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> >> Lukasz Majewski >> >> Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group > > Looking at the code, I don't think there is any value changing the > SDHCI_READ_STATUS_TIMEOUT from 1000 to 100. > But maybe someone (Jaehoon ?) could comment on the impact of this > SDHCI_READ_STATUS_TIMEOUT value in the SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_R1B case... > Does it affect performance in anyway?
There is no performance effect whatever SDHCI_READ_STATUS_TIMEOUT is using value. So i think that we don't need to revert it.. SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_R1B had been added from me. At that time, i didn't know why added SDHCI_INT_DAT_END. I'm not sure but if remove the SDHCI_INT_DAT_END, I guess that SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_R1B can be also removed. (quirks is workaround flags, so if it can be removed, it's best.) In future, I want to remove SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_R1B. Best Regards, Jaehoon Chung > If it does, the I'll prepare a patch.... > > Thanks, Steve > > > _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
