[U-Boot] [PATCH] AT91:mmc:fix multiple read/write error

[Reinhard Meyer]

Dear Andy, dear Elen,
> According to datasheet,set block count before multiple read/write.
> 
> Signed-off-by: elen.song <elen.song at atmel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/mmc/atmel_mci.h     |    9 ++++++++-
>  drivers/mmc/gen_atmel_mci.c |    4 ++++
>  2 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/atmel_mci.h b/drivers/mmc/atmel_mci.h
> index 90ab6a8..3095d22 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/atmel_mci.h
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/atmel_mci.h
> @@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ typedef struct atmel_mci {
>  	u32	sdcr;	/* 0x0c */
>  	u32	argr;	/* 0x10 */
>  	u32	cmdr;	/* 0x14 */
> -	u32	_18;	/* 0x18 */
> +	u32	blkr;	/* 0x18 */
>  	u32	_1c;	/* 0x1c */
>  	u32	rspr;	/* 0x20 */
>  	u32	rspr1;	/* 0x24 */
> @@ -67,6 +67,7 @@ typedef struct atmel_mci {
>  #define MMCI_SDCR				0x000c
>  #define MMCI_ARGR				0x0010
>  #define MMCI_CMDR				0x0014
> +#define MMCI_BLKR				0x0018
>  #define MMCI_RSPR				0x0020
>  #define MMCI_RSPR1				0x0024
>  #define MMCI_RSPR2				0x0028
> @@ -140,6 +141,12 @@ typedef struct atmel_mci {
>  #define MMCI_TRTYP_OFFSET			19
>  #define MMCI_TRTYP_SIZE				2
>  
> +/* Bitfields in BLKR */
> +#define MMCI_BCNT_OFFSET			0
> +#define MMCI_BCNT_SIZE				16
> +#define MMCI_BLKLEN_OFFSET			16
> +#define MMCI_BLKLEN_SIZE			16
> +
>  /* Bitfields in RSPRx */
>  #define MMCI_RSP_OFFSET				0
>  #define MMCI_RSP_SIZE				32
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/gen_atmel_mci.c b/drivers/mmc/gen_atmel_mci.c
> index f346b24..d217574 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/gen_atmel_mci.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/gen_atmel_mci.c
> @@ -183,6 +183,10 @@ mci_send_cmd(struct mmc *mmc, struct mmc_cmd *cmd, struct mmc_data *data)
>  	/* Figure out the transfer arguments */
>  	cmdr = mci_encode_cmd(cmd, data, &error_flags);
>  
> +	if (data)
> +		writel(MMCI_BF(BCNT, data->blocks) |
> +			MMCI_BF(BLKLEN,	mmc->read_bl_len), &mci->blkr);
> +
>  	/* Send the command */
>  	writel(cmd->cmdarg, &mci->argr);
>  	writel(cmdr, &mci->cmdr);

I find it highly irregular that this patch has made it into mainline!

1. We have had a discussion about that I think the approach in this
patch is wrong. My concerns have not been addressed yet.

2. This is clearly an ATMEL domain/custodian patch.

3. I was not put on CC by Elen.

4. Andy snapped it away and applied it without sending an "Applied to"
message.


Best Regards,
Reinhard