Hello.
On 09/25/2015 11:24 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote:
There seems to be no sense in the runtime PM calls when the actual register
read is suppressed by the TMIO_MMC_WRPROTECT_DISABLE flag. Check that flag
before trying to read the register and thus doing the runtime PM dance...
While at it, kill useless local variable and add empty line after declarations.
Signed-off-by: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtyl...@cogentembedded.com>
---
The patch is against Ulf Hansson's 'mmc.git' repo's 'next' branch.
drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_pio.c | 8 +++++---
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Index: mmc/drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_pio.c
===================================================================
--- mmc.orig/drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_pio.c
+++ mmc/drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_pio.c
@@ -988,14 +988,16 @@ static void tmio_mmc_set_ios(struct mmc_
static int tmio_mmc_get_ro(struct mmc_host *mmc)
{
struct tmio_mmc_host *host = mmc_priv(mmc);
- struct tmio_mmc_data *pdata = host->pdata;
int ret = mmc_gpio_get_ro(mmc);
+
if (ret >= 0)
return ret;
+ if (host->pdata->flags & TMIO_MMC_WRPROTECT_DISABLE)
+ return 0;
+
pm_runtime_get_sync(mmc_dev(mmc));
- ret = !((pdata->flags & TMIO_MMC_WRPROTECT_DISABLE) ||
- (sd_ctrl_read32(host, CTL_STATUS) & TMIO_STAT_WRPROTECT));
+ ret = !(sd_ctrl_read32(host, CTL_STATUS) & TMIO_STAT_WRPROTECT);
pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(mmc_dev(mmc));
pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(mmc_dev(mmc));
Actually this change won't have the desired effect, as the mmc core
already done a pm_runtime_get_sync() since it has claimed the mmc
host[1].
I do realize that most drivers are still maintaining the
pm_runtime_get|put() calls, but in most cases that's not needed any
more.
Hm, OK. Should be OK to remove the RPM dances from at least this
particular driver, right?
[1]
commit 9250aea76bfc ("mmc: core: Enable runtime PM management of host devices")
Looking at the code, the following fragment of mmc_attach_sd() doesn't
make much sense to me:
mmc_release_host(host);
err = mmc_add_card(host->card);
mmc_claim_host(host);
if (err)
goto remove_card;
return 0;
remove_card:
mmc_release_host(host);
mmc_remove_card(host->card);
host->card = NULL;
mmc_claim_host(host);
Why claim the host and immediately release it on mmc_add_card() error? Can
we only claim on success and save a call here?
Kind regards
Uffe
MBR, 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
