RE: [PATCH v1] mmc: card: Adding support for sanitize in eMMC 4.5

From: Luca Porzio (lporzio)
Date: Mon Mar 25 2013 - 09:18:31 EST

Next message: KY Srinivasan: "RE: [PATCH V2 1/3] mm: Export split_page()"
Previous message: Heikki Krogerus: "Re: [PATCH 3/3] serial: of_serial: Handle hw-flow-control property"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Maya,

It sounds good for me.
What about the second comment about issuing the HPI on timeout?

If you think we can accept to issue an HPI on timeout, I think the first comment about the timeout duration can also be neglected.

Thanks,
Luca

> -----Original Message-----
> From: linux-mmc-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-mmc-
> owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of merez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 8:50 PM
> To: Luca Porzio (lporzio)
> Cc: Yaniv Gardi; linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; vgoyal@xxxxxxxxxx;
> tj@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-arm-msm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v1] mmc: card: Adding support for sanitize in eMMC 4.5
>
> Hi Luca,
>
> Having a timeout that takes into consideration the card size would be
> artificial as we cannot have the ability to create a function for its
> calculation that will fit all the card vendors.
>
> I suggest keeping it as a constant value for simplicity, as 4 minutes
> cover all the card sizes.
>
> Thanks,
> Maya
> > Hi Yaniv,
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: linux-mmc-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-mmc-
> >> owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Yaniv Gardi
> >> Sent: Sunday, February 24, 2013 12:39 PM
> >> To: linux-mmc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; vgoyal@xxxxxxxxxx; tj@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> >> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Cc: linux-arm-msm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Yaniv Gardi
> >> Subject: [PATCH v1] mmc: card: Adding support for sanitize in eMMC 4.5
> >>
> >> The sanitize support is added as a user-app ioctl call, and
> >> was removed from the block-device request, since its purpose is
> >> to be invoked not via File-System but by a user.
> >> This feature deletes the unmap memory region of the eMMC card,
> >> by writing to a specific register in the EXT_CSD.
> >> unmap region is the memory region that was previously deleted
> >> (by erase, trim or discard operation).
> >> In order to avoid timeout when sanitizing large-scale cards,
> >> the timeout for sanitize operation is 240 seconds.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Yaniv Gardi <ygardi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/mmc/card/block.c | 68
> >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> >> ---
> >> drivers/mmc/card/queue.c | 2 +-
> >> include/linux/mmc/host.h | 1 +
> >> 3 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/card/block.c b/drivers/mmc/card/block.c
> >> index 21056b9..21bb8b4 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/mmc/card/block.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/card/block.c
> >> @@ -58,6 +58,8 @@ MODULE_ALIAS("mmc:block");
> >> #define INAND_CMD38_ARG_SECTRIM1 0x81
> >> #define INAND_CMD38_ARG_SECTRIM2 0x88
> >> #define MMC_BLK_TIMEOUT_MS (10 * 60 * 1000) /* 10 minute
> >> timeout
> >> */
> >> +#define MMC_SANITIZE_REQ_TIMEOUT 240000
> >
> > Though I would agree that 4 minutes is a reasonable sanitize time,
> > the sanitize command may also depend on card size.
> > As such I am not sure whether it can be regarded as a constant or
> > needs to be proportional to card size.
> >
> >> +#define MMC_EXTRACT_INDEX_FROM_ARG(x) ((x & 0x00FF0000) >> 16)
> >>
> >> static DEFINE_MUTEX(block_mutex);
> >>
> >> @@ -394,6 +396,35 @@ static int ioctl_rpmb_card_status_poll(struct
> >> mmc_card
> >> *card, u32 *status,
> >> return err;
> >> }
> >>
> >> +static int ioctl_do_sanitize(struct mmc_card *card)
> >> +{
> >> + int err;
> >> +
> >> + if (!(mmc_can_sanitize(card) &&
> >> + (card->host->caps2 & MMC_CAP2_SANITIZE))) {
> >> + pr_warn("%s: %s - SANITIZE is not supported\n",
> >> + mmc_hostname(card->host), __func__);
> >> + err = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >> + goto out;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> + pr_debug("%s: %s - SANITIZE IN PROGRESS...\n",
> >> + mmc_hostname(card->host), __func__);
> >> +
> >> + err = mmc_switch(card, EXT_CSD_CMD_SET_NORMAL,
> >> + EXT_CSD_SANITIZE_START, 1,
> >> + MMC_SANITIZE_REQ_TIMEOUT);
> >> +
> >> + if (err)
> >> + pr_err("%s: %s - EXT_CSD_SANITIZE_START failed. err=%d\n",
> >> + mmc_hostname(card->host), __func__, err);
> >> +
> >
> > In case of Sanitize timeout, the eMMC might go in an unclear state.
> > May I suggest to:
> > - issue an HPI before leaving thus bring the eMMC back into safe status
> > - report the 'sanitize not complete error' and let the user decide on
> > Whether he wants to re-issue (i.e. continue) the sanitize or just let
> > it go.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Luca
> >
> >> + pr_debug("%s: %s - SANITIZE COMPLETED\n", mmc_hostname(card->host),
> >> + __func__);
> >> +out:
> >> + return err;
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> static int mmc_blk_ioctl_cmd(struct block_device *bdev,
> >> struct mmc_ioc_cmd __user *ic_ptr)
> >> {
> >> @@ -496,6 +527,16 @@ static int mmc_blk_ioctl_cmd(struct block_device
> >> *bdev,
> >> goto cmd_rel_host;
> >> }
> >>
> >> + if (MMC_EXTRACT_INDEX_FROM_ARG(cmd.arg) == EXT_CSD_SANITIZE_START) {
> >> + err = ioctl_do_sanitize(card);
> >> +
> >> + if (err)
> >> + pr_err("%s: ioctl_do_sanitize() failed. err = %d",
> >> + __func__, err);
> >> +
> >> + goto cmd_rel_host;
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> mmc_wait_for_req(card->host, &mrq);
> >>
> >> if (cmd.error) {
> >> @@ -925,10 +966,10 @@ static int mmc_blk_issue_secdiscard_rq(struct
> >> mmc_queue *mq,
> >> {
> >> struct mmc_blk_data *md = mq->data;
> >> struct mmc_card *card = md->queue.card;
> >> - unsigned int from, nr, arg, trim_arg, erase_arg;
> >> + unsigned int from, nr, arg;
> >> int err = 0, type = MMC_BLK_SECDISCARD;
> >>
> >> - if (!(mmc_can_secure_erase_trim(card) || mmc_can_sanitize(card))) {
> >> + if (!(mmc_can_secure_erase_trim(card))) {
> >> err = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> >> goto out;
> >> }
> >> @@ -936,23 +977,11 @@ static int mmc_blk_issue_secdiscard_rq(struct
> >> mmc_queue *mq,
> >> from = blk_rq_pos(req);
> >> nr = blk_rq_sectors(req);
> >>
> >> - /* The sanitize operation is supported at v4.5 only */
> >> - if (mmc_can_sanitize(card)) {
> >> - erase_arg = MMC_ERASE_ARG;
> >> - trim_arg = MMC_TRIM_ARG;
> >> - } else {
> >> - erase_arg = MMC_SECURE_ERASE_ARG;
> >> - trim_arg = MMC_SECURE_TRIM1_ARG;
> >> - }
> >> + if (mmc_can_trim(card) && !mmc_erase_group_aligned(card, from, nr))
> >> + arg = MMC_SECURE_TRIM1_ARG;
> >> + else
> >> + arg = MMC_SECURE_ERASE_ARG;
> >>
> >> - if (mmc_erase_group_aligned(card, from, nr))
> >> - arg = erase_arg;
> >> - else if (mmc_can_trim(card))
> >> - arg = trim_arg;
> >> - else {
> >> - err = -EINVAL;
> >> - goto out;
> >> - }
> >> retry:
> >> if (card->quirks & MMC_QUIRK_INAND_CMD38) {
> >> err = mmc_switch(card, EXT_CSD_CMD_SET_NORMAL,
> >> @@ -988,9 +1017,6 @@ retry:
> >> goto out;
> >> }
> >>
> >> - if (mmc_can_sanitize(card))
> >> - err = mmc_switch(card, EXT_CSD_CMD_SET_NORMAL,
> >> - EXT_CSD_SANITIZE_START, 1, 0);
> >> out_retry:
> >> if (err && !mmc_blk_reset(md, card->host, type))
> >> goto retry;
> >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/card/queue.c b/drivers/mmc/card/queue.c
> >> index fadf52e..483f0e8 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/mmc/card/queue.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/card/queue.c
> >> @@ -148,7 +148,7 @@ static void mmc_queue_setup_discard(struct
> >> request_queue *q,
> >> /* granularity must not be greater than max. discard */
> >> if (card->pref_erase > max_discard)
> >> q->limits.discard_granularity = 0;
> >> - if (mmc_can_secure_erase_trim(card) || mmc_can_sanitize(card))
> >> + if (mmc_can_secure_erase_trim(card))
> >> queue_flag_set_unlocked(QUEUE_FLAG_SECDISCARD, q);
> >> }
> >>
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/mmc/host.h b/include/linux/mmc/host.h
> >> index 61a10c1..045e9f7 100644
> >> --- a/include/linux/mmc/host.h
> >> +++ b/include/linux/mmc/host.h
> >> @@ -258,6 +258,7 @@ struct mmc_host {
> >> #define MMC_CAP2_HC_ERASE_SZ (1 << 9) /* High-capacity erase size */
> >> #define MMC_CAP2_CD_ACTIVE_HIGH (1 << 10) /* Card-detect signal
> active
> >> high */
> >> #define MMC_CAP2_RO_ACTIVE_HIGH (1 << 11) /* Write-protect signal
> >> active
> >> high */
> >> +#define MMC_CAP2_SANITIZE (1 << 12) /* Support Sanitize */
> >>
> >> mmc_pm_flag_t pm_caps; /* supported pm features */
> >>
> >> --
> >> 1.7.6
> >> --
> >> Sent by a consultant of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
> >> The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora
> >> Forum
> >> --
> >> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
> >> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > --
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> >
>
>
> --
> Maya Erez
> QUALCOMM ISRAEL, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member
> of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: KY Srinivasan: "RE: [PATCH V2 1/3] mm: Export split_page()"
Previous message: Heikki Krogerus: "Re: [PATCH 3/3] serial: of_serial: Handle hw-flow-control property"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]