[PATCH] mmc: sdhci-pltfm: Fix timeout on t4240's sdhci controller

Gala Kumar-B11780 B11780 at freescale.com
Fri Mar 8 03:30:14 EST 2013


On Mar 7, 2013, at 2:05 AM, Chunhe Lan wrote:

> This patch fixes timeout problems on t4240's sdhci controller:
> 
> 	mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25!
> 	mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25!
> 	mmc0: Too large timeout requested for CMD25!
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chunhe Lan <Chunhe.Lan at freescale.com>
> ---
> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c |    1 +
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c
> index 3145a78..9db7b12 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-pltfm.c
> @@ -94,6 +94,7 @@ void sdhci_get_of_property(struct platform_device *pdev)
> 
> 		if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,p2020-esdhc") ||
> 		    of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,p1010-esdhc") ||
> +		    of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,t4240-esdhc") ||
> 		    of_device_is_compatible(np, "fsl,mpc8536-esdhc"))
> 			host->quirks |= SDHCI_QUIRK_BROKEN_TIMEOUT_VAL;
> 
> -- 
> 1.7.6.5
> 


Why does this occur?  Is it a board issue?  Is it a silicon issue?  Is it due to some erratum?  Why T4 only?

- k


More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list