[U-Boot] [PATCH] dfu: mmc: Replace calls to u-boot commands with native mmc API
For some time we have been using the run_command() with properly crafted string. Such approach turned to be unreliable and error prone.
Switch to "native" mmc subsystem API would allow better type checking and shall improve speed.
Also, it seems that this API is changing less often than u-boot commands. The approach similar to env operations on the eMMC has been reused.
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski l.majewski@samsung.com --- drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c index 0816f46..651cfff 100644 --- a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c +++ b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ #include <errno.h> #include <div64.h> #include <dfu.h> +#include <mmc.h>
static unsigned char __aligned(CONFIG_SYS_CACHELINE_SIZE) dfu_file_buf[CONFIG_SYS_DFU_MAX_FILE_SIZE]; @@ -20,8 +21,8 @@ static long dfu_file_buf_len; static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, u64 offset, void *buf, long *len) { - char cmd_buf[DFU_CMD_BUF_SIZE]; - u32 blk_start, blk_count; + struct mmc *mmc = find_mmc_device(dfu->dev_num); + u32 blk_start, blk_count, n = 0;
/* * We must ensure that we work in lba_blk_size chunks, so ALIGN @@ -38,12 +39,28 @@ static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, return -EINVAL; }
- sprintf(cmd_buf, "mmc %s %p %x %x", - op == DFU_OP_READ ? "read" : "write", - buf, blk_start, blk_count); + debug("%s: %s dev: %d start: %d cnt: %d buf: 0x%p\n", __func__, + op == DFU_OP_READ ? "MMC READ" : "MMC WRITE", dfu->dev_num, + blk_start, blk_count, buf); + switch (op) { + case DFU_OP_READ: + n = mmc->block_dev.block_read(dfu->dev_num, blk_start, + blk_count, buf); + break; + case DFU_OP_WRITE: + n = mmc->block_dev.block_write(dfu->dev_num, blk_start, + blk_count, buf); + break; + default: + error("Operation not supported\n"); + }
- debug("%s: %s 0x%p\n", __func__, cmd_buf, cmd_buf); - return run_command(cmd_buf, 0); + if (n != blk_count) { + error("MMC operation failed"); + return -EIO; + } + + return 0; }
static int mmc_file_buffer(struct dfu_entity *dfu, void *buf, long *len)
Hi Lukasz,
Looks fine to me. Let me run a few tests over the weekend and I'll apply.
Thanks
-- Pantelis
On Feb 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
For some time we have been using the run_command() with properly crafted string. Such approach turned to be unreliable and error prone.
Switch to "native" mmc subsystem API would allow better type checking and shall improve speed.
Also, it seems that this API is changing less often than u-boot commands. The approach similar to env operations on the eMMC has been reused.
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski l.majewski@samsung.com
drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c index 0816f46..651cfff 100644 --- a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c +++ b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ #include <errno.h> #include <div64.h> #include <dfu.h> +#include <mmc.h>
static unsigned char __aligned(CONFIG_SYS_CACHELINE_SIZE) dfu_file_buf[CONFIG_SYS_DFU_MAX_FILE_SIZE]; @@ -20,8 +21,8 @@ static long dfu_file_buf_len; static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, u64 offset, void *buf, long *len) {
- char cmd_buf[DFU_CMD_BUF_SIZE];
- u32 blk_start, blk_count;
struct mmc *mmc = find_mmc_device(dfu->dev_num);
u32 blk_start, blk_count, n = 0;
/*
- We must ensure that we work in lba_blk_size chunks, so ALIGN
@@ -38,12 +39,28 @@ static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, return -EINVAL; }
- sprintf(cmd_buf, "mmc %s %p %x %x",
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "read" : "write",buf, blk_start, blk_count);
- debug("%s: %s dev: %d start: %d cnt: %d buf: 0x%p\n", __func__,
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "MMC READ" : "MMC WRITE", dfu->dev_num,blk_start, blk_count, buf);- switch (op) {
- case DFU_OP_READ:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_read(dfu->dev_num, blk_start,blk_count, buf);break;- case DFU_OP_WRITE:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_write(dfu->dev_num, blk_start,blk_count, buf);break;- default:
error("Operation not supported\n");- }
- debug("%s: %s 0x%p\n", __func__, cmd_buf, cmd_buf);
- return run_command(cmd_buf, 0);
- if (n != blk_count) {
error("MMC operation failed");return -EIO;- }
- return 0;
}
static int mmc_file_buffer(struct dfu_entity *dfu, void *buf, long *len)
1.7.10.4
Hi Pantelis,
Hi Lukasz,
Looks fine to me.
Let me run a few tests over the weekend
I was wondering if we could share tests for DFU?
Will it be suitable to put it in the ./test/dfu?
and I'll apply.
Thanks
-- Pantelis
On Feb 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
For some time we have been using the run_command() with properly crafted string. Such approach turned to be unreliable and error prone.
Switch to "native" mmc subsystem API would allow better type checking and shall improve speed.
Also, it seems that this API is changing less often than u-boot commands. The approach similar to env operations on the eMMC has been reused.
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski l.majewski@samsung.com
drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c index 0816f46..651cfff 100644 --- a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c +++ b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ #include <errno.h> #include <div64.h> #include <dfu.h> +#include <mmc.h>
static unsigned char __aligned(CONFIG_SYS_CACHELINE_SIZE) dfu_file_buf[CONFIG_SYS_DFU_MAX_FILE_SIZE]; @@ -20,8 +21,8 @@ static long dfu_file_buf_len; static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, u64 offset, void *buf, long *len) {
- char cmd_buf[DFU_CMD_BUF_SIZE];
- u32 blk_start, blk_count;
struct mmc *mmc = find_mmc_device(dfu->dev_num);
u32 blk_start, blk_count, n = 0;
/*
- We must ensure that we work in lba_blk_size chunks, so
ALIGN @@ -38,12 +39,28 @@ static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, return -EINVAL; }
- sprintf(cmd_buf, "mmc %s %p %x %x",
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "read" : "write",buf, blk_start, blk_count);
- debug("%s: %s dev: %d start: %d cnt: %d buf: 0x%p\n",
__func__,
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "MMC READ" : "MMC WRITE",dfu->dev_num,
blk_start, blk_count, buf);- switch (op) {
- case DFU_OP_READ:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_read(dfu->dev_num,blk_start,
blk_count, buf);break;- case DFU_OP_WRITE:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_write(dfu->dev_num,blk_start,
blk_count, buf);break;- default:
error("Operation not supported\n");- }
- debug("%s: %s 0x%p\n", __func__, cmd_buf, cmd_buf);
- return run_command(cmd_buf, 0);
- if (n != blk_count) {
error("MMC operation failed");return -EIO;- }
- return 0;
}
static int mmc_file_buffer(struct dfu_entity *dfu, void *buf, long *len) -- 1.7.10.4
Hi Pantelis,
Hi Lukasz,
Looks fine to me. Let me run a few tests over the weekend and I'll apply.
Have the run test gone smoothly?
Thanks
-- Pantelis
On Feb 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
For some time we have been using the run_command() with properly crafted string. Such approach turned to be unreliable and error prone.
Switch to "native" mmc subsystem API would allow better type checking and shall improve speed.
Also, it seems that this API is changing less often than u-boot commands. The approach similar to env operations on the eMMC has been reused.
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski l.majewski@samsung.com
drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c index 0816f46..651cfff 100644 --- a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c +++ b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ #include <errno.h> #include <div64.h> #include <dfu.h> +#include <mmc.h>
static unsigned char __aligned(CONFIG_SYS_CACHELINE_SIZE) dfu_file_buf[CONFIG_SYS_DFU_MAX_FILE_SIZE]; @@ -20,8 +21,8 @@ static long dfu_file_buf_len; static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, u64 offset, void *buf, long *len) {
- char cmd_buf[DFU_CMD_BUF_SIZE];
- u32 blk_start, blk_count;
struct mmc *mmc = find_mmc_device(dfu->dev_num);
u32 blk_start, blk_count, n = 0;
/*
- We must ensure that we work in lba_blk_size chunks, so
ALIGN @@ -38,12 +39,28 @@ static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, return -EINVAL; }
- sprintf(cmd_buf, "mmc %s %p %x %x",
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "read" : "write",buf, blk_start, blk_count);
- debug("%s: %s dev: %d start: %d cnt: %d buf: 0x%p\n",
__func__,
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "MMC READ" : "MMC WRITE",dfu->dev_num,
blk_start, blk_count, buf);- switch (op) {
- case DFU_OP_READ:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_read(dfu->dev_num,blk_start,
blk_count, buf);break;- case DFU_OP_WRITE:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_write(dfu->dev_num,blk_start,
blk_count, buf);break;- default:
error("Operation not supported\n");- }
- debug("%s: %s 0x%p\n", __func__, cmd_buf, cmd_buf);
- return run_command(cmd_buf, 0);
- if (n != blk_count) {
error("MMC operation failed");return -EIO;- }
- return 0;
}
static int mmc_file_buffer(struct dfu_entity *dfu, void *buf, long *len) -- 1.7.10.4
Hi Lukasz,
On Feb 27, 2014, at 10:36 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Pantelis,
Hi Lukasz,
Looks fine to me. Let me run a few tests over the weekend and I'll apply.
Have the run test gone smoothly?
In the middle of reworking some core stuff in mmc, will test when that's done.
Regards
-- Pantelis
Thanks
-- Pantelis
On Feb 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
For some time we have been using the run_command() with properly crafted string. Such approach turned to be unreliable and error prone.
Switch to "native" mmc subsystem API would allow better type checking and shall improve speed.
Also, it seems that this API is changing less often than u-boot commands. The approach similar to env operations on the eMMC has been reused.
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski l.majewski@samsung.com
drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c index 0816f46..651cfff 100644 --- a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c +++ b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ #include <errno.h> #include <div64.h> #include <dfu.h> +#include <mmc.h>
static unsigned char __aligned(CONFIG_SYS_CACHELINE_SIZE) dfu_file_buf[CONFIG_SYS_DFU_MAX_FILE_SIZE]; @@ -20,8 +21,8 @@ static long dfu_file_buf_len; static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, u64 offset, void *buf, long *len) {
- char cmd_buf[DFU_CMD_BUF_SIZE];
- u32 blk_start, blk_count;
struct mmc *mmc = find_mmc_device(dfu->dev_num);
u32 blk_start, blk_count, n = 0;
/*
- We must ensure that we work in lba_blk_size chunks, so
ALIGN @@ -38,12 +39,28 @@ static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, return -EINVAL; }
- sprintf(cmd_buf, "mmc %s %p %x %x",
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "read" : "write",buf, blk_start, blk_count);
- debug("%s: %s dev: %d start: %d cnt: %d buf: 0x%p\n",
__func__,
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "MMC READ" : "MMC WRITE",dfu->dev_num,
blk_start, blk_count, buf);- switch (op) {
- case DFU_OP_READ:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_read(dfu->dev_num,blk_start,
blk_count, buf);break;- case DFU_OP_WRITE:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_write(dfu->dev_num,blk_start,
blk_count, buf);break;- default:
error("Operation not supported\n");- }
- debug("%s: %s 0x%p\n", __func__, cmd_buf, cmd_buf);
- return run_command(cmd_buf, 0);
- if (n != blk_count) {
error("MMC operation failed");return -EIO;- }
- return 0;
}
static int mmc_file_buffer(struct dfu_entity *dfu, void *buf, long *len) -- 1.7.10.4
-- Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
Hi Pantelis,
Hi Lukasz,
On Feb 27, 2014, at 10:36 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Pantelis,
Hi Lukasz,
Looks fine to me. Let me run a few tests over the weekend and I'll apply.
Have the run test gone smoothly?
In the middle of reworking some core stuff in mmc, will test when that's done.
Does your rework intend to change the MMC API?
I'm regarding this patch as one suitable for v2014.04, since it replaces cumbersome sprintf() approach with the native mmc API.
Those operations are done at dfu_mmc.c, not any core mmc file.
Regards
-- Pantelis
Thanks
-- Pantelis
On Feb 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
For some time we have been using the run_command() with properly crafted string. Such approach turned to be unreliable and error prone.
Switch to "native" mmc subsystem API would allow better type checking and shall improve speed.
Also, it seems that this API is changing less often than u-boot commands. The approach similar to env operations on the eMMC has been reused.
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski l.majewski@samsung.com
drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c index 0816f46..651cfff 100644 --- a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c +++ b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ #include <errno.h> #include <div64.h> #include <dfu.h> +#include <mmc.h>
static unsigned char __aligned(CONFIG_SYS_CACHELINE_SIZE) dfu_file_buf[CONFIG_SYS_DFU_MAX_FILE_SIZE]; @@ -20,8 +21,8 @@ static long dfu_file_buf_len; static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, u64 offset, void *buf, long *len) {
- char cmd_buf[DFU_CMD_BUF_SIZE];
- u32 blk_start, blk_count;
struct mmc *mmc = find_mmc_device(dfu->dev_num);
u32 blk_start, blk_count, n = 0;
/*
- We must ensure that we work in lba_blk_size chunks, so
ALIGN @@ -38,12 +39,28 @@ static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, return -EINVAL; }
- sprintf(cmd_buf, "mmc %s %p %x %x",
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "read" : "write",buf, blk_start, blk_count);
- debug("%s: %s dev: %d start: %d cnt: %d buf: 0x%p\n",
__func__,
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "MMC READ" : "MMC WRITE",dfu->dev_num,
blk_start, blk_count, buf);- switch (op) {
- case DFU_OP_READ:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_read(dfu->dev_num,blk_start,
blk_count, buf);break;- case DFU_OP_WRITE:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_write(dfu->dev_num,blk_start,
blk_count, buf);break;- default:
error("Operation not supported\n");- }
- debug("%s: %s 0x%p\n", __func__, cmd_buf, cmd_buf);
- return run_command(cmd_buf, 0);
- if (n != blk_count) {
error("MMC operation failed");return -EIO;- }
- return 0;
}
static int mmc_file_buffer(struct dfu_entity *dfu, void *buf, long *len) -- 1.7.10.4
-- Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
Hi Lukasz,
On Feb 27, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Pantelis,
Hi Lukasz,
On Feb 27, 2014, at 10:36 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Pantelis,
Hi Lukasz,
Looks fine to me. Let me run a few tests over the weekend and I'll apply.
Have the run test gone smoothly?
In the middle of reworking some core stuff in mmc, will test when that's done.
Does your rework intend to change the MMC API?
I'm regarding this patch as one suitable for v2014.04, since it replaces cumbersome sprintf() approach with the native mmc API.
Those operations are done at dfu_mmc.c, not any core mmc file.
Your point is valid; I'll try to give it a spin today.
Regards
-- Pantelis
Thanks
-- Pantelis
On Feb 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
For some time we have been using the run_command() with properly crafted string. Such approach turned to be unreliable and error prone.
Switch to "native" mmc subsystem API would allow better type checking and shall improve speed.
Also, it seems that this API is changing less often than u-boot commands. The approach similar to env operations on the eMMC has been reused.
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski l.majewski@samsung.com
drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c index 0816f46..651cfff 100644 --- a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c +++ b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ #include <errno.h> #include <div64.h> #include <dfu.h> +#include <mmc.h>
static unsigned char __aligned(CONFIG_SYS_CACHELINE_SIZE) dfu_file_buf[CONFIG_SYS_DFU_MAX_FILE_SIZE]; @@ -20,8 +21,8 @@ static long dfu_file_buf_len; static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, u64 offset, void *buf, long *len) {
- char cmd_buf[DFU_CMD_BUF_SIZE];
- u32 blk_start, blk_count;
struct mmc *mmc = find_mmc_device(dfu->dev_num);
u32 blk_start, blk_count, n = 0;
/*
- We must ensure that we work in lba_blk_size chunks, so
ALIGN @@ -38,12 +39,28 @@ static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, return -EINVAL; }
- sprintf(cmd_buf, "mmc %s %p %x %x",
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "read" : "write",buf, blk_start, blk_count);
- debug("%s: %s dev: %d start: %d cnt: %d buf: 0x%p\n",
__func__,
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "MMC READ" : "MMC WRITE",dfu->dev_num,
blk_start, blk_count, buf);- switch (op) {
- case DFU_OP_READ:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_read(dfu->dev_num,blk_start,
blk_count, buf);break;- case DFU_OP_WRITE:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_write(dfu->dev_num,blk_start,
blk_count, buf);break;- default:
error("Operation not supported\n");- }
- debug("%s: %s 0x%p\n", __func__, cmd_buf, cmd_buf);
- return run_command(cmd_buf, 0);
- if (n != blk_count) {
error("MMC operation failed");return -EIO;- }
- return 0;
}
static int mmc_file_buffer(struct dfu_entity *dfu, void *buf, long *len) -- 1.7.10.4
-- Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
-- Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
Hi Pantelis,
Hi Lukasz,
On Feb 27, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Pantelis,
Hi Lukasz,
On Feb 27, 2014, at 10:36 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Pantelis,
Hi Lukasz,
Looks fine to me. Let me run a few tests over the weekend and I'll apply.
Have the run test gone smoothly?
In the middle of reworking some core stuff in mmc, will test when that's done.
Does your rework intend to change the MMC API?
I'm regarding this patch as one suitable for v2014.04, since it replaces cumbersome sprintf() approach with the native mmc API.
Those operations are done at dfu_mmc.c, not any core mmc file.
Your point is valid; I'll try to give it a spin today.
Ping.
Regards
-- Pantelis
Thanks
-- Pantelis
On Feb 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
For some time we have been using the run_command() with properly crafted string. Such approach turned to be unreliable and error prone.
Switch to "native" mmc subsystem API would allow better type checking and shall improve speed.
Also, it seems that this API is changing less often than u-boot commands. The approach similar to env operations on the eMMC has been reused.
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski l.majewski@samsung.com
drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c index 0816f46..651cfff 100644 --- a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c +++ b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ #include <errno.h> #include <div64.h> #include <dfu.h> +#include <mmc.h>
static unsigned char __aligned(CONFIG_SYS_CACHELINE_SIZE) dfu_file_buf[CONFIG_SYS_DFU_MAX_FILE_SIZE]; @@ -20,8 +21,8 @@ static long dfu_file_buf_len; static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, u64 offset, void *buf, long *len) {
- char cmd_buf[DFU_CMD_BUF_SIZE];
- u32 blk_start, blk_count;
struct mmc *mmc = find_mmc_device(dfu->dev_num);
u32 blk_start, blk_count, n = 0;
/*
- We must ensure that we work in lba_blk_size chunks,
so ALIGN @@ -38,12 +39,28 @@ static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, return -EINVAL; }
- sprintf(cmd_buf, "mmc %s %p %x %x",
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "read" : "write",buf, blk_start, blk_count);
- debug("%s: %s dev: %d start: %d cnt: %d buf: 0x%p\n",
__func__,
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "MMC READ" : "MMC WRITE",dfu->dev_num,
blk_start, blk_count, buf);- switch (op) {
- case DFU_OP_READ:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_read(dfu->dev_num,blk_start,
blk_count, buf);break;- case DFU_OP_WRITE:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_write(dfu->dev_num,blk_start,
blk_count, buf);break;- default:
error("Operation not supported\n");- }
- debug("%s: %s 0x%p\n", __func__, cmd_buf, cmd_buf);
- return run_command(cmd_buf, 0);
- if (n != blk_count) {
error("MMC operation failed");return -EIO;- }
- return 0;
}
static int mmc_file_buffer(struct dfu_entity *dfu, void *buf, long *len) -- 1.7.10.4
-- Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
-- Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
Hi Tom, Pantelis
Hi Lukasz,
On Feb 27, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Pantelis,
Hi Lukasz,
On Feb 27, 2014, at 10:36 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Pantelis,
Hi Lukasz,
Looks fine to me. Let me run a few tests over the weekend and I'll apply.
Have the run test gone smoothly?
In the middle of reworking some core stuff in mmc, will test when that's done.
Does your rework intend to change the MMC API?
I'm regarding this patch as one suitable for v2014.04, since it replaces cumbersome sprintf() approach with the native mmc API.
Those operations are done at dfu_mmc.c, not any core mmc file.
Your point is valid; I'll try to give it a spin today.
Tom, Pantelis would it be possible to add this patch to the v2014.04? This patch was initially posted some time ago.
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/322450/
Replacing at DFU core the sprintf() with call to native eMMC API seems appealing :-).
Regards
-- Pantelis
Thanks
-- Pantelis
On Feb 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
For some time we have been using the run_command() with properly crafted string. Such approach turned to be unreliable and error prone.
Switch to "native" mmc subsystem API would allow better type checking and shall improve speed.
Also, it seems that this API is changing less often than u-boot commands. The approach similar to env operations on the eMMC has been reused.
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski l.majewski@samsung.com
drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c index 0816f46..651cfff 100644 --- a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c +++ b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ #include <errno.h> #include <div64.h> #include <dfu.h> +#include <mmc.h>
static unsigned char __aligned(CONFIG_SYS_CACHELINE_SIZE) dfu_file_buf[CONFIG_SYS_DFU_MAX_FILE_SIZE]; @@ -20,8 +21,8 @@ static long dfu_file_buf_len; static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, u64 offset, void *buf, long *len) {
- char cmd_buf[DFU_CMD_BUF_SIZE];
- u32 blk_start, blk_count;
struct mmc *mmc = find_mmc_device(dfu->dev_num);
u32 blk_start, blk_count, n = 0;
/*
- We must ensure that we work in lba_blk_size chunks,
so ALIGN @@ -38,12 +39,28 @@ static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, return -EINVAL; }
- sprintf(cmd_buf, "mmc %s %p %x %x",
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "read" : "write",buf, blk_start, blk_count);
- debug("%s: %s dev: %d start: %d cnt: %d buf: 0x%p\n",
__func__,
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "MMC READ" : "MMC WRITE",dfu->dev_num,
blk_start, blk_count, buf);- switch (op) {
- case DFU_OP_READ:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_read(dfu->dev_num,blk_start,
blk_count, buf);break;- case DFU_OP_WRITE:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_write(dfu->dev_num,blk_start,
blk_count, buf);break;- default:
error("Operation not supported\n");- }
- debug("%s: %s 0x%p\n", __func__, cmd_buf, cmd_buf);
- return run_command(cmd_buf, 0);
- if (n != blk_count) {
error("MMC operation failed");return -EIO;- }
- return 0;
}
static int mmc_file_buffer(struct dfu_entity *dfu, void *buf, long *len) -- 1.7.10.4
-- Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
-- Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
Hi Lukasz,
On Mar 12, 2014, at 10:06 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Tom, Pantelis
Hi Lukasz,
On Feb 27, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Pantelis,
Hi Lukasz,
On Feb 27, 2014, at 10:36 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Pantelis,
Hi Lukasz,
Looks fine to me. Let me run a few tests over the weekend and I'll apply.
Have the run test gone smoothly?
In the middle of reworking some core stuff in mmc, will test when that's done.
Does your rework intend to change the MMC API?
I'm regarding this patch as one suitable for v2014.04, since it replaces cumbersome sprintf() approach with the native mmc API.
Those operations are done at dfu_mmc.c, not any core mmc file.
Your point is valid; I'll try to give it a spin today.
Tom, Pantelis would it be possible to add this patch to the v2014.04? This patch was initially posted some time ago.
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/322450/
Replacing at DFU core the sprintf() with call to native eMMC API seems appealing :-).
Yes, it is :)
I'm going to include it; just busy with some mmc reorg right now.
Regards
-- Pantelis
Regards
-- Pantelis
Thanks
-- Pantelis
On Feb 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> For some time we have been using the run_command() with properly > crafted string. Such approach turned to be unreliable and error > prone. > > Switch to "native" mmc subsystem API would allow better type > checking and shall improve speed. > > Also, it seems that this API is changing less often than u-boot > commands. The approach similar to env operations on the eMMC has > been reused. > > Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski l.majewski@samsung.com > --- > drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c > index 0816f46..651cfff 100644 > --- a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c > +++ b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c > @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ > #include <errno.h> > #include <div64.h> > #include <dfu.h> > +#include <mmc.h> > > static unsigned char __aligned(CONFIG_SYS_CACHELINE_SIZE) > dfu_file_buf[CONFIG_SYS_DFU_MAX_FILE_SIZE]; > @@ -20,8 +21,8 @@ static long dfu_file_buf_len; > static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, > u64 offset, void *buf, long *len) > { > - char cmd_buf[DFU_CMD_BUF_SIZE]; > - u32 blk_start, blk_count; > + struct mmc *mmc = find_mmc_device(dfu->dev_num); > + u32 blk_start, blk_count, n = 0; > > /* > * We must ensure that we work in lba_blk_size chunks, > so ALIGN @@ -38,12 +39,28 @@ static int mmc_block_op(enum > dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, return -EINVAL; > } > > - sprintf(cmd_buf, "mmc %s %p %x %x", > - op == DFU_OP_READ ? "read" : "write", > - buf, blk_start, blk_count); > + debug("%s: %s dev: %d start: %d cnt: %d buf: 0x%p\n", > __func__, > + op == DFU_OP_READ ? "MMC READ" : "MMC WRITE", > dfu->dev_num, > + blk_start, blk_count, buf); > + switch (op) { > + case DFU_OP_READ: > + n = mmc->block_dev.block_read(dfu->dev_num, > blk_start, > + blk_count, buf); > + break; > + case DFU_OP_WRITE: > + n = mmc->block_dev.block_write(dfu->dev_num, > blk_start, > + blk_count, buf); > + break; > + default: > + error("Operation not supported\n"); > + } > > - debug("%s: %s 0x%p\n", __func__, cmd_buf, cmd_buf); > - return run_command(cmd_buf, 0); > + if (n != blk_count) { > + error("MMC operation failed"); > + return -EIO; > + } > + > + return 0; > } > > static int mmc_file_buffer(struct dfu_entity *dfu, void *buf, > long *len) -- > 1.7.10.4 >
-- Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
-- Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
-- Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
Hi Pantelis, Tom,
Hi Lukasz,
On Mar 12, 2014, at 10:06 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Tom, Pantelis
Hi Lukasz,
On Feb 27, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Pantelis,
Hi Lukasz,
On Feb 27, 2014, at 10:36 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Pantelis,
> Hi Lukasz, > > Looks fine to me. Let me run a few tests over the weekend and > I'll apply.
Have the run test gone smoothly?
In the middle of reworking some core stuff in mmc, will test when that's done.
Does your rework intend to change the MMC API?
I'm regarding this patch as one suitable for v2014.04, since it replaces cumbersome sprintf() approach with the native mmc API.
Those operations are done at dfu_mmc.c, not any core mmc file.
Your point is valid; I'll try to give it a spin today.
Tom, Pantelis would it be possible to add this patch to the v2014.04? This patch was initially posted some time ago.
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/322450/
Replacing at DFU core the sprintf() with call to native eMMC API seems appealing :-).
Yes, it is :)
I'm going to include it; just busy with some mmc reorg right now.
I think that, it would be better to ask Tom to pull it directly, since it is changing the code in the DFU not mmc.
Regards
-- Pantelis
Regards
-- Pantelis
> > Thanks > > -- Pantelis > > On Feb 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote: > >> For some time we have been using the run_command() with >> properly crafted string. Such approach turned to be >> unreliable and error prone. >> >> Switch to "native" mmc subsystem API would allow better type >> checking and shall improve speed. >> >> Also, it seems that this API is changing less often than >> u-boot commands. The approach similar to env operations on >> the eMMC has been reused. >> >> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski l.majewski@samsung.com >> --- >> drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------- >> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c >> index 0816f46..651cfff 100644 >> --- a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c >> +++ b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c >> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ >> #include <errno.h> >> #include <div64.h> >> #include <dfu.h> >> +#include <mmc.h> >> >> static unsigned char __aligned(CONFIG_SYS_CACHELINE_SIZE) >> dfu_file_buf[CONFIG_SYS_DFU_MAX_FILE_SIZE]; >> @@ -20,8 +21,8 @@ static long dfu_file_buf_len; >> static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity >> *dfu, u64 offset, void *buf, long *len) >> { >> - char cmd_buf[DFU_CMD_BUF_SIZE]; >> - u32 blk_start, blk_count; >> + struct mmc *mmc = find_mmc_device(dfu->dev_num); >> + u32 blk_start, blk_count, n = 0; >> >> /* >> * We must ensure that we work in lba_blk_size chunks, >> so ALIGN @@ -38,12 +39,28 @@ static int mmc_block_op(enum >> dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, return -EINVAL; >> } >> >> - sprintf(cmd_buf, "mmc %s %p %x %x", >> - op == DFU_OP_READ ? "read" : "write", >> - buf, blk_start, blk_count); >> + debug("%s: %s dev: %d start: %d cnt: %d buf: 0x%p\n", >> __func__, >> + op == DFU_OP_READ ? "MMC READ" : "MMC WRITE", >> dfu->dev_num, >> + blk_start, blk_count, buf); >> + switch (op) { >> + case DFU_OP_READ: >> + n = mmc->block_dev.block_read(dfu->dev_num, >> blk_start, >> + blk_count, >> buf); >> + break; >> + case DFU_OP_WRITE: >> + n = mmc->block_dev.block_write(dfu->dev_num, >> blk_start, >> + blk_count, >> buf); >> + break; >> + default: >> + error("Operation not supported\n"); >> + } >> >> - debug("%s: %s 0x%p\n", __func__, cmd_buf, cmd_buf); >> - return run_command(cmd_buf, 0); >> + if (n != blk_count) { >> + error("MMC operation failed"); >> + return -EIO; >> + } >> + >> + return 0; >> } >> >> static int mmc_file_buffer(struct dfu_entity *dfu, void *buf, >> long *len) -- >> 1.7.10.4 >> >
-- Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
-- Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
-- Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
On Mar 12, 2014, at 1:12 PM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Pantelis, Tom,
Hi Lukasz,
On Mar 12, 2014, at 10:06 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Tom, Pantelis
Hi Lukasz,
On Feb 27, 2014, at 11:21 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
Hi Pantelis,
Hi Lukasz,
On Feb 27, 2014, at 10:36 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote:
> Hi Pantelis, > >> Hi Lukasz, >> >> Looks fine to me. Let me run a few tests over the weekend and >> I'll apply. > > Have the run test gone smoothly? >
In the middle of reworking some core stuff in mmc, will test when that's done.
Does your rework intend to change the MMC API?
I'm regarding this patch as one suitable for v2014.04, since it replaces cumbersome sprintf() approach with the native mmc API.
Those operations are done at dfu_mmc.c, not any core mmc file.
Your point is valid; I'll try to give it a spin today.
Tom, Pantelis would it be possible to add this patch to the v2014.04? This patch was initially posted some time ago.
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/322450/
Replacing at DFU core the sprintf() with call to native eMMC API seems appealing :-).
Yes, it is :)
I'm going to include it; just busy with some mmc reorg right now.
I think that, it would be better to ask Tom to pull it directly, since it is changing the code in the DFU not mmc.
FWIW your patch applies cleanly even after the changes.
It will be part of the next mmc pull request, but I have no objection to Tom picking it up directly.
Regards
-- Pantelis
Regards
-- Pantelis
Regards
-- Pantelis
>> >> Thanks >> >> -- Pantelis >> >> On Feb 21, 2014, at 9:23 AM, Lukasz Majewski wrote: >> >>> For some time we have been using the run_command() with >>> properly crafted string. Such approach turned to be >>> unreliable and error prone. >>> >>> Switch to "native" mmc subsystem API would allow better type >>> checking and shall improve speed. >>> >>> Also, it seems that this API is changing less often than >>> u-boot commands. The approach similar to env operations on >>> the eMMC has been reused. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski l.majewski@samsung.com >>> --- >>> drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------- >>> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c >>> index 0816f46..651cfff 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c >>> +++ b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c >>> @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ >>> #include <errno.h> >>> #include <div64.h> >>> #include <dfu.h> >>> +#include <mmc.h> >>> >>> static unsigned char __aligned(CONFIG_SYS_CACHELINE_SIZE) >>> dfu_file_buf[CONFIG_SYS_DFU_MAX_FILE_SIZE]; >>> @@ -20,8 +21,8 @@ static long dfu_file_buf_len; >>> static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity >>> *dfu, u64 offset, void *buf, long *len) >>> { >>> - char cmd_buf[DFU_CMD_BUF_SIZE]; >>> - u32 blk_start, blk_count; >>> + struct mmc *mmc = find_mmc_device(dfu->dev_num); >>> + u32 blk_start, blk_count, n = 0; >>> >>> /* >>> * We must ensure that we work in lba_blk_size chunks, >>> so ALIGN @@ -38,12 +39,28 @@ static int mmc_block_op(enum >>> dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, return -EINVAL; >>> } >>> >>> - sprintf(cmd_buf, "mmc %s %p %x %x", >>> - op == DFU_OP_READ ? "read" : "write", >>> - buf, blk_start, blk_count); >>> + debug("%s: %s dev: %d start: %d cnt: %d buf: 0x%p\n", >>> __func__, >>> + op == DFU_OP_READ ? "MMC READ" : "MMC WRITE", >>> dfu->dev_num, >>> + blk_start, blk_count, buf); >>> + switch (op) { >>> + case DFU_OP_READ: >>> + n = mmc->block_dev.block_read(dfu->dev_num, >>> blk_start, >>> + blk_count, >>> buf); >>> + break; >>> + case DFU_OP_WRITE: >>> + n = mmc->block_dev.block_write(dfu->dev_num, >>> blk_start, >>> + blk_count, >>> buf); >>> + break; >>> + default: >>> + error("Operation not supported\n"); >>> + } >>> >>> - debug("%s: %s 0x%p\n", __func__, cmd_buf, cmd_buf); >>> - return run_command(cmd_buf, 0); >>> + if (n != blk_count) { >>> + error("MMC operation failed"); >>> + return -EIO; >>> + } >>> + >>> + return 0; >>> } >>> >>> static int mmc_file_buffer(struct dfu_entity *dfu, void *buf, >>> long *len) -- >>> 1.7.10.4 >>> >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > > Lukasz Majewski > > Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
-- Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
-- Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
-- Best regards,
Lukasz Majewski
Samsung R&D Institute Poland (SRPOL) | Linux Platform Group
Hi Lukasz,
For some time we have been using the run_command() with properly crafted string. Such approach turned to be unreliable and error prone.
Switch to "native" mmc subsystem API would allow better type checking and shall improve speed.
Also, it seems that this API is changing less often than u-boot commands. The approach similar to env operations on the eMMC has been reused.
Signed-off-by: Lukasz Majewski l.majewski@samsung.com
drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c index 0816f46..651cfff 100644 --- a/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c +++ b/drivers/dfu/dfu_mmc.c @@ -12,6 +12,7 @@ #include <errno.h> #include <div64.h> #include <dfu.h> +#include <mmc.h>
static unsigned char __aligned(CONFIG_SYS_CACHELINE_SIZE) dfu_file_buf[CONFIG_SYS_DFU_MAX_FILE_SIZE]; @@ -20,8 +21,8 @@ static long dfu_file_buf_len; static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, u64 offset, void *buf, long *len) {
- char cmd_buf[DFU_CMD_BUF_SIZE];
- u32 blk_start, blk_count;
struct mmc *mmc = find_mmc_device(dfu->dev_num);
u32 blk_start, blk_count, n = 0;
/*
- We must ensure that we work in lba_blk_size chunks, so
ALIGN @@ -38,12 +39,28 @@ static int mmc_block_op(enum dfu_op op, struct dfu_entity *dfu, return -EINVAL; }
- sprintf(cmd_buf, "mmc %s %p %x %x",
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "read" : "write",buf, blk_start, blk_count);
- debug("%s: %s dev: %d start: %d cnt: %d buf: 0x%p\n",
__func__,
op == DFU_OP_READ ? "MMC READ" : "MMC WRITE",dfu->dev_num,
blk_start, blk_count, buf);- switch (op) {
- case DFU_OP_READ:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_read(dfu->dev_num,blk_start,
blk_count, buf);break;- case DFU_OP_WRITE:
n = mmc->block_dev.block_write(dfu->dev_num,blk_start,
blk_count, buf);break;- default:
error("Operation not supported\n");- }
- debug("%s: %s 0x%p\n", __func__, cmd_buf, cmd_buf);
- return run_command(cmd_buf, 0);
- if (n != blk_count) {
error("MMC operation failed");return -EIO;- }
- return 0;
}
static int mmc_file_buffer(struct dfu_entity *dfu, void *buf, long *len)
Applied to u-boot-dfu.
participants (3)
-
Lukasz Majewski -
Lukasz Majewski -
Pantelis Antoniou