Hello.
On 02/15/2015 05:46 PM, Yoshihiro Kaneko wrote:
From: Kouichi Tomita <kouichi.tomita...@renesas.com>
A command end interrupt should not be processed between command issue
and setting of wait_for flag. It expects already the flag to be set.
Therefore the exclusive control was added.
Signed-off-by: Kouichi Tomita <kouichi.tomita...@renesas.com>
Signed-off-by: Yoshihiro Kaneko <ykaneko0...@gmail.com>
---
This patch is based on next branch of Chris Ball's mmc tree.
drivers/mmc/host/sh_mmcif.c | 11 ++++++++++-
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sh_mmcif.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sh_mmcif.c
index 7d9d6a3..e5d0b42 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/host/sh_mmcif.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sh_mmcif.c
[...]
@@ -1171,6 +1174,12 @@ static irqreturn_t sh_mmcif_irqt(int irq, void *dev_id)
struct sh_mmcif_host *host = dev_id;
struct mmc_request *mrq;
bool wait = false;
+ unsigned long flags;
+ int wait_work;
+
+ spin_lock_irqsave(&host->lock, flags);
+ wait_work = host->wait_for;
+ spin_unlock_irqrestore(&host->lock, flags);
Locking don't seem to have much sense here, as the read is already atomic.
WBR, Sergei
--
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
