> -----Original Message----- > From: Marc Koschewski [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 8:23 PM > To: Dong, Chuanxiao > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1]mmc: fix division by zero when calculate mmc erase > time > > * Dong, Chuanxiao <[email protected]> [2011-02-24 20:09:59 +0800]: > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Marc Koschewski [mailto:[email protected]] > > > Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2011 7:38 PM > > > To: Dong, Chuanxiao > > > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; > > > [email protected]; [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1]mmc: fix division by zero when calculate mmc erase > time > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > * Chuanxiao Dong <[email protected]> [2011-02-24 19:18:01 +0800]: > > > > > > > Since if clock gating feature is enabled, the clock frequency may be > > > > zero when > > > > host clock is gated. In such scenario, mmc_set_mmc_erase_timeout() may > have a > > > > division by zero bug. > > > > > > > > So this patch used mmc_host_clk_rate() to fix this. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chuanxiao Dong <[email protected]> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 10 ++++++++-- > > > > 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c > > > > index 34a7e8c..12d0eb8 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c > > > > @@ -1201,8 +1201,14 @@ static void mmc_set_mmc_erase_timeout(struct > > > mmc_card *card, > > > > * less but not that much less, so fudge it by > > > > multiplying by 2. > > > > */ > > > > timeout_clks <<= 1; > > > > - timeout_us += (timeout_clks * 1000) / > > > > - (card->host->ios.clock / 1000); > > > > + > > > > + /* > > > > + * at this moment, host controller maybe clock gated, > > > > so make > > > > + * sure we can get a correct host clock freq. > > > > + */ > > > > + if (mmc_host_clk_rate(card->host)) > > > > + timeout_us += (timeout_clks * 1000) / > > > > + (mmc_host_clk_rate(card->host) / > > > > 1000); > > > > > > Why don't you just reuse mmc_host_clk_rate()'s result instead of calling > > > it > twice? > > This is a incline function and just return host->ios.clock. Reuse > mmc_host_clk_rate()'s result need to add a new variable to save the value. > > It's not inline on trunk and it spinlocks. > > drivers/mmc/core/host.c:195 > > 194 */ > 195 unsigned int mmc_host_clk_rate(struct mmc_host *host) > 196 { OK. With the clock gating framework enabled... I agree. So, what do you think? Add a new variable is better?
Thanks Chuanxiao -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
