[PATCH] mmc: mmci: Do not release spinlock in request_end

Ulf Hansson ulf.hansson at stericsson.com
Fri Oct 14 03:51:44 EDT 2011


Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 09:37:51AM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>> Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 15:29 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 04:06:41PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>>>> The patch "mmc: core: move ->request() call from atomic context",
>>>>> is the reason to why this change is possible. This simplifies the
>>>>> error handling code execution path quite a lot and potentially also
>>>>> fixes some error handling hang problems.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson at stericsson.com>
>>>> This doesn't look right:
>>>>
>>>> void mmc_request_done(struct mmc_host *host, struct mmc_request *mrq)
>>>> {
>>>>         if (err && cmd->retries) {
>>>>                 host->ops->request(host, mrq);
>>>>
>> This is NOT how it looks at mmc-next. You need to test with Adrian  
>> Hunters patch which the commit refers two.
> 
> In that case, how can I take the patch to mmci if it depends on something
> in another tree?
> 

I don't know. But how do you update your tree from next normally? I 
believe the problem is more related to that the mmc-next tree is now on 
a temporary git. If you do not update your tree how shall we be able to 
continue with integration of new patches that depends on mmc patches 
from "next"?

BR
Uffe





More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list