Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1426961
| From | Guenter Roeck <groeck@google.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 05/15] phy: rockchip-emmc: Increase lock time allowance |
| Date | 2016-06-20 21:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rMdd7-3XL-9@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <rMbO2-3aM-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <rMbO2-3aM-33@gated-at.bofh.it> <rMdd7-3XL-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <rMdd7-3XL-13@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 12:36 PM, Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 12:29 PM, Guenter Roeck <groeck@google.com> wrote: >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 10:56 AM, Douglas Anderson >> <dianders@chromium.org> wrote: >>> Previous PHY code waited a fixed amount of time for the DLL to lock at >>> power on time. Unfortunately, the time for the DLL to lock is actually >>> a bit more dynamic and can be longer if the card clock is slower. >>> >>> Instead of waiting a fixed 30 us, let's now dynamically wait until the >>> lock bit gets set. We'll wait up to 10 ms which should be OK even if >>> the card clock is at the super slow 100 kHz. >>> >> >> 10 ms active delay (no sleep) is actually quite long. Can this code sleep ? > > It is expected that in nearly all cases it will be much shorter than > 10ms. The longest expected (at 400kHz) is 1.3 ms and we should only > be probing down to 300, 200, 100 kHz if we are having trouble > communicating. When running at a normal speed (50 MHz, 100 MHz, etc) > it should be much smaller and closer to 10 us or less. We could still > try to sleep in some of these cases, but IMHO the extra code > complexity for something like this that should happen very > infrequently (only at bootup or if we decide to re-tune) is probably > not worth it. Also note that at boot eMMC is (probably) on the > critical path, so there may be some boot speed benefits to continuing > as quickly as possible. > Makes sense. Thanks, Guenter
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH v3 05/15] phy: rockchip-emmc: Increase lock time allowance Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> - 2016-06-20 20:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH v3 05/15] phy: rockchip-emmc: Increase lock time allowance Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> - 2016-06-20 21:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH v3 05/15] phy: rockchip-emmc: Increase lock time allowance Guenter Roeck <groeck@google.com> - 2016-06-20 21:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH v3 05/15] phy: rockchip-emmc: Increase lock time allowance Guenter Roeck <groeck@google.com> - 2016-06-20 21:40 +0200
csiph-web