On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 02:39:04PM +0100, Simon Horman wrote: > From: Masaharu Hayakawa <masaharu.hayakawa...@renesas.com> > > If the return value of mmc_send_tuning() is error other than -EILSEQ, the > tuning fails and process goes out of for_loop. But the correct processing > is to judge their TAP as bad.
Ideally, we would have more specific reasons why this is correct processing. What other codes could happen here? > Signed-off-by: Masaharu Hayakawa <masaharu.hayakawa...@renesas.com> > Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <horms+rene...@verge.net.au> > --- > v2 [Simon Horman] > * Added to patchset targeted at upstream > * Minor revision of changelog > > v0 [Masaharu Hayakawa] > --- > drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_core.c | 5 +---- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_core.c > b/drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_core.c > index 6d8719be75a8..41767d33ef97 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_core.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_core.c > @@ -800,10 +800,7 @@ static int tmio_mmc_execute_tuning(struct mmc_host *mmc, > u32 opcode) > if (host->prepare_tuning) > host->prepare_tuning(host, i % host->tap_num); > > - ret = mmc_send_tuning(mmc, opcode, NULL); > - if (ret && ret != -EILSEQ) > - goto out; > - if (ret == 0) > + if (!mmc_send_tuning(mmc, opcode, NULL)) I'd prefer (mmc_send_tuning() == 0) here instead of '!mmc_send_tuning()'. This reads as 'is ok' while the other reads more 'if not ok'. > set_bit(i, host->taps); > > usleep_range(1000, 1200); > -- > 2.11.0 >
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
