On 31/01/12 14:54, Ulf Hansson wrote: > Adrian Hunter wrote: >> On 19/01/12 18:39, Ulf Hansson wrote: >>> Once the card has been detected to be removed by the >>> mmc_detect_card_removed function, schedule a new detect work >>> immediately and without a delay to let a rescan remove the >>> card device as soon a possible. This will sooner prevent >>> further I/O requests. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hans...@stericsson.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 16 ++++++++++++++-- >>> 1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c >>> index bec0bf2..265dfd8 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c >>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c >>> @@ -2077,6 +2077,7 @@ int _mmc_detect_card_removed(struct mmc_host *host) >>> int mmc_detect_card_removed(struct mmc_host *host) >>> { >>> struct mmc_card *card = host->card; >>> + int ret; >>> >>> WARN_ON(!host->claimed); >>> /* >>> @@ -2086,9 +2087,20 @@ int mmc_detect_card_removed(struct mmc_host *host) >>> if (card && !host->detect_change && !(host->caps & MMC_CAP_NEEDS_POLL)) >>> return mmc_card_removed(card); >>> >>> - host->detect_change = 0; >> >> That line should not be removed. It is not related to your change. > > I think it is. Since my patch is trying to make it possible to "prevent I/O > as soon as possible..."
No, the value of detect_change does not affect the outcome if MMC_CAP2_DETECT_ON_ERR is set i.e.: if (card && !host->detect_change && !(host->caps & MMC_CAP_NEEDS_POLL) && !(host->caps2 & MMC_CAP2_DETECT_ON_ERR)) is always false if (host->caps2 & MMC_CAP2_DETECT_ON_ERR) is true > > Clearing the detect_change flag here will prevent the I/O layer from doing > further tests to see if the card is removed by using "mmc_detect_card_removed > -> _mmc_detect_card_removed" due to the upper if sentence. > > I think this flag should only be cleared from the mmc_rescan function. > >> >>> + ret = mmc_card_removed(card); >> >> Calling mmc_card_removed() is not needed here since >> _mmc_detect_card_removed() does it anyway. >> >>> + if (!ret) { >>> + ret = _mmc_detect_card_removed(host); >>> + if (ret) { >>> + /* >>> + * Schedule a detect work as soon as possible to let a >>> + * rescan handle the card removal. >>> + */ >>> + cancel_delayed_work(&host->detect); >> >> Why cancel the detect work? > > To "prevent I/O as soon as possible...". > > The detect work could have been scheduled to be run at several ms later. > There is no need to wait for it since we already now that card will be > removed when the rescan function will execute. > >> >>> + mmc_detect_change(host, 0); >>> + } >>> + } >>> >>> - return _mmc_detect_card_removed(host); >>> + return ret; >>> } >>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(mmc_detect_card_removed); >>> >> >> > > Br > Ulf Hansson > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html