On Tue, June 12, 2012 8:07 pm, Jaehoon Chung wrote: > On 06/12/2012 07:58 PM, [email protected] wrote: > >>> @@ -359,12 +443,15 @@ struct mmc_async_req *mmc_start_req(struct >> mmc_host >>> *host, >>> if (!err && areq) >>> start_err = __mmc_start_req(host, areq->mrq); >>> >>> - if (host->areq) >>> + if (host->areq) { >>> + if (!areq && host->areq && mmc_card_mmc(host->card)) >>> + mmc_start_bkops(host->card); >> I think it would be better to start tey BKOPs in the queue thread when >> it >> becomes idle. >> We have seen cases where there are several requests fetched and then >> NULL >> but by the time the previous request ends there are more requests to be >> fetched. Starting the BKOPs here instead of in the queue thread >> increases >> the probability of using HPI to stop the BKOPs due to incoming request, >> which is not a desirable action. > > I will change this point. > >> >>> mmc_post_req(host, host->areq->mrq, 0); >>> + } >>> >>> /* Cancel a prepared request if it was not started. */ >>> if ((err || start_err) && areq) >>> - mmc_post_req(host, areq->mrq, -EINVAL); >>> + mmc_post_req(host, areq->mrq, -EINVAL); >> Remove this change, it is not related to this patch. > > Ok. > Anything else? > > Best Regards, > Jaehoon Chung We have no further comments.
Thanks, Maya Erez -- Sent by consultant of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum -- 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
