[PATCHv7 5/5] mmc: dw_mmc: replace "disable-wp" from slot's quirk to host's quirk

[Doug Anderson]

Jaehoon,

On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung at samsung.com> wrote:
> Hi, Doug.
>
> Thanks for review.
>
> On 07/30/2014 03:01 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> Jaehoon,
>>
>> On Sun, Jul 27, 2014 at 7:29 PM, Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung at samsung.com> wrote:
>>> Replaced the "disable-wp" into host's quirks.
>>> (Because the slot-node is removed at dt-file.)
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung at samsung.com>
>>> Tested-by: Sachin Kamat <sachin.kamat at samsung.com>
>>> Acked-by: Seungwon Jeon <tgih.jun at samsung.com>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c  |   12 +++++-------
>>>  include/linux/mmc/dw_mmc.h |    6 ++----
>>>  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>>> index 1ac227c..4a4f66f 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/dw_mmc.c
>>> @@ -997,7 +997,7 @@ static int dw_mci_get_ro(struct mmc_host *mmc)
>>>         int gpio_ro = mmc_gpio_get_ro(mmc);
>>>
>>>         /* Use platform get_ro function, else try on board write protect */
>>> -       if (slot->quirks & DW_MCI_SLOT_QUIRK_NO_WRITE_PROTECT)
>>> +       if (slot->host->quirks & DW_MCI_QUIRK_NO_WRITE_PROTECT)
>>
>> It doesn't seem like it would be hard to include support for the old
>> binding (and just print a warning).  Then this could land ahead of the
>> device tree changes.
>>
>> Generally I think we're supposed to keep support for old device trees
>> if possible (except in extreme cases).
> Ok, I see. I will add the Warning message like this. ("Recommend not to use the slot-node...")

That seems reasonable.


> Then Developers can change the device-tree, right.

Right.  Then this can land even ahead of the dts changes and you could
change them one at a time (if you wanted) once you have the proper
acks.


> Today, i will send the patch. If you have any other comment, let me know, plz.
> I want to merge this patch-set into 3.16.

I haven't done a full review, but generally this looked pretty sane to
me.  It seems like it might be too late for 3.16 but I'm no expert on
the subject.

-Doug