Commit 299c4608 authored by Linus Torvalds's avatar Linus Torvalds

Merge tag 'mmc-v4.13-rc6' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ulfh/mmc

Pull MMC fix from Ulf Hansson:
 "MMC core: don't return error code R1_OUT_OF_RANGE for open-ending mode"

* tag 'mmc-v4.13-rc6' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/ulfh/mmc:
  mmc: block: prevent propagating R1_OUT_OF_RANGE for open-ending mode
parents 8efeb350 d83c2dba
...@@ -1371,12 +1371,46 @@ static inline void mmc_apply_rel_rw(struct mmc_blk_request *brq, ...@@ -1371,12 +1371,46 @@ static inline void mmc_apply_rel_rw(struct mmc_blk_request *brq,
R1_CC_ERROR | /* Card controller error */ \ R1_CC_ERROR | /* Card controller error */ \
R1_ERROR) /* General/unknown error */ R1_ERROR) /* General/unknown error */
static bool mmc_blk_has_cmd_err(struct mmc_command *cmd) static void mmc_blk_eval_resp_error(struct mmc_blk_request *brq)
{ {
if (!cmd->error && cmd->resp[0] & CMD_ERRORS) u32 val;
cmd->error = -EIO;
return cmd->error; /*
* Per the SD specification(physical layer version 4.10)[1],
* section 4.3.3, it explicitly states that "When the last
* block of user area is read using CMD18, the host should
* ignore OUT_OF_RANGE error that may occur even the sequence
* is correct". And JESD84-B51 for eMMC also has a similar
* statement on section 6.8.3.
*
* Multiple block read/write could be done by either predefined
* method, namely CMD23, or open-ending mode. For open-ending mode,
* we should ignore the OUT_OF_RANGE error as it's normal behaviour.
*
* However the spec[1] doesn't tell us whether we should also
* ignore that for predefined method. But per the spec[1], section
* 4.15 Set Block Count Command, it says"If illegal block count
* is set, out of range error will be indicated during read/write
* operation (For example, data transfer is stopped at user area
* boundary)." In another word, we could expect a out of range error
* in the response for the following CMD18/25. And if argument of
* CMD23 + the argument of CMD18/25 exceed the max number of blocks,
* we could also expect to get a -ETIMEDOUT or any error number from
* the host drivers due to missing data response(for write)/data(for
* read), as the cards will stop the data transfer by itself per the
* spec. So we only need to check R1_OUT_OF_RANGE for open-ending mode.
*/
if (!brq->stop.error) {
bool oor_with_open_end;
/* If there is no error yet, check R1 response */
val = brq->stop.resp[0] & CMD_ERRORS;
oor_with_open_end = val & R1_OUT_OF_RANGE && !brq->mrq.sbc;
if (val && !oor_with_open_end)
brq->stop.error = -EIO;
}
} }
static enum mmc_blk_status mmc_blk_err_check(struct mmc_card *card, static enum mmc_blk_status mmc_blk_err_check(struct mmc_card *card,
...@@ -1400,8 +1434,11 @@ static enum mmc_blk_status mmc_blk_err_check(struct mmc_card *card, ...@@ -1400,8 +1434,11 @@ static enum mmc_blk_status mmc_blk_err_check(struct mmc_card *card,
* stop.error indicates a problem with the stop command. Data * stop.error indicates a problem with the stop command. Data
* may have been transferred, or may still be transferring. * may have been transferred, or may still be transferring.
*/ */
if (brq->sbc.error || brq->cmd.error || mmc_blk_has_cmd_err(&brq->stop) ||
brq->data.error) { mmc_blk_eval_resp_error(brq);
if (brq->sbc.error || brq->cmd.error ||
brq->stop.error || brq->data.error) {
switch (mmc_blk_cmd_recovery(card, req, brq, &ecc_err, &gen_err)) { switch (mmc_blk_cmd_recovery(card, req, brq, &ecc_err, &gen_err)) {
case ERR_RETRY: case ERR_RETRY:
return MMC_BLK_RETRY; return MMC_BLK_RETRY;
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment