[U-Boot] [PATCH] dw_mmc: cleanups

[Jaehoon Chung <jh80.chung@samsung.com>]

Hi, Pavel.

It looks good to me. 
If you're ok, can i suggest one thing?

On 09/05/2014 07:49 PM, Pavel Machek wrote:
> 
> dw_mmc driver was responding to errors with debug(). Change that to
> prinf so that any errors are immediately obvious. Also adjust english
> in comments.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@denx.de>
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/dw_mmc.c b/drivers/mmc/dw_mmc.c
> index 0df30bc..4c16e7f 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/dw_mmc.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/dw_mmc.c
> @@ -177,14 +177,16 @@ static int dwmci_send_cmd(struct mmc *mmc, struct mmc_cmd *cmd,
>  		}
>  	}
>  
> -	if (i == retry)
> +	if (i == retry) {
> +		printf("dwmci_send_cmd: timeout..\n");
>  		return TIMEOUT;
> +	}
>  
>  	if (mask & DWMCI_INTMSK_RTO) {
> -		debug("Response Timeout..\n");
> +		printf("dwmci_send_cmd: Response Timeout..\n");
>  		return TIMEOUT;
>  	} else if (mask & DWMCI_INTMSK_RE) {
> -		debug("Response Error..\n");
> +		printf("dwmci_send_cmd: Response Error..\n");
>  		return -1;
>  	}
>  
> @@ -204,7 +206,7 @@ static int dwmci_send_cmd(struct mmc *mmc, struct mmc_cmd *cmd,
>  		do {
>  			mask = dwmci_readl(host, DWMCI_RINTSTS);
>  			if (mask & (DWMCI_DATA_ERR | DWMCI_DATA_TOUT)) {
> -				debug("DATA ERROR!\n");
> +				printf("dwmci_send_cmd: DATA ERROR!\n");
>  				return -1;
>  			}
>  		} while (!(mask & DWMCI_INTMSK_DTO));
> @@ -232,16 +234,16 @@ static int dwmci_setup_bus(struct dwmci_host *host, u32 freq)
>  	if ((freq == host->clock) || (freq == 0))
>  		return 0;
>  	/*
> -	 * If host->get_mmc_clk didn't define,
> +	 * If host->get_mmc_clk isn't defined,
>  	 * then assume that host->bus_hz is source clock value.
> -	 * host->bus_hz should be set from user.
> +	 * host->bus_hz should be set by user.
>  	 */
>  	if (host->get_mmc_clk)
>  		sclk = host->get_mmc_clk(host);
>  	else if (host->bus_hz)
>  		sclk = host->bus_hz;
>  	else {
> -		printf("Didn't get source clock value..\n");
> +		printf("dwmci_setup_bus: Didn't get source clock value..\n");
>  		return -EINVAL;
>  	}
>  
> @@ -260,7 +262,7 @@ static int dwmci_setup_bus(struct dwmci_host *host, u32 freq)
>  	do {
>  		status = dwmci_readl(host, DWMCI_CMD);
>  		if (timeout-- < 0) {
> -			printf("TIMEOUT error!!\n");
> +			printf("dwmci_setup_bus: timeout!\n");
>  			return -ETIMEDOUT;
>  		}
>  	} while (status & DWMCI_CMD_START);
> @@ -275,7 +277,7 @@ static int dwmci_setup_bus(struct dwmci_host *host, u32 freq)
>  	do {
>  		status = dwmci_readl(host, DWMCI_CMD);
>  		if (timeout-- < 0) {
> -			printf("TIMEOUT error!!\n");
> +			printf("dwmci_setup_bus: timeout!\n");
According to your the main purpose, this patch is goal that noticed where/what error is occurred.
Then i think good that add the "__LINE__".
Because there are same message like "dwmci_setup_bus: tiemout!\n" at some place.

Then i think we don't need to discuss about this patch with Marek. :)

Best Regards,
Jaehoon Chung

>  			return -ETIMEDOUT;
>  		}
>  	} while (status & DWMCI_CMD_START);
> @@ -290,7 +292,7 @@ static void dwmci_set_ios(struct mmc *mmc)
>  	struct dwmci_host *host = (struct dwmci_host *)mmc->priv;
>  	u32 ctype, regs;
>  
> -	debug("Buswidth = %d, clock: %d\n",mmc->bus_width, mmc->clock);
> +	debug("Buswidth = %d, clock: %d\n", mmc->bus_width, mmc->clock);
>  
>  	dwmci_setup_bus(host, mmc->clock);
>  	switch (mmc->bus_width) {
> @@ -329,7 +331,7 @@ static int dwmci_init(struct mmc *mmc)
>  	dwmci_writel(host, DWMCI_PWREN, 1);
>  
>  	if (!dwmci_wait_reset(host, DWMCI_RESET_ALL)) {
> -		debug("%s[%d] Fail-reset!!\n",__func__,__LINE__);
> +		printf("%s[%d] Fail-reset!!\n", __func__, __LINE__);
>  		return -1;
>  	}
>  
>