Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] mmc: tmio: correct treatment of errors during tuning

[Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1604 bytes --]

On Fri, Jan 19, 2018 at 02:39:04PM +0100, Simon Horman wrote:
> From: Masaharu Hayakawa <masaharu.hayakawa.ry@renesas.com>
> 
> If the return value of mmc_send_tuning() is error other than -EILSEQ, the
> tuning fails and process goes out of for_loop.  But the correct processing
> is to judge their TAP as bad.

Ideally, we would have more specific reasons why this is correct processing.

What other codes could happen here?

> Signed-off-by: Masaharu Hayakawa <masaharu.hayakawa.ry@renesas.com>
> Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <horms+renesas@verge.net.au>
> ---
> v2 [Simon Horman]
> * Added to patchset targeted at upstream
> * Minor revision of changelog
> 
> v0 [Masaharu Hayakawa]
> ---
>  drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_core.c | 5 +----
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_core.c b/drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_core.c
> index 6d8719be75a8..41767d33ef97 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/tmio_mmc_core.c
> @@ -800,10 +800,7 @@ static int tmio_mmc_execute_tuning(struct mmc_host *mmc, u32 opcode)
>  		if (host->prepare_tuning)
>  			host->prepare_tuning(host, i % host->tap_num);
>  
> -		ret = mmc_send_tuning(mmc, opcode, NULL);
> -		if (ret && ret != -EILSEQ)
> -			goto out;
> -		if (ret == 0)
> +		if (!mmc_send_tuning(mmc, opcode, NULL))

I'd prefer (mmc_send_tuning() == 0) here instead of '!mmc_send_tuning()'.
This reads as 'is ok' while the other reads more 'if not ok'.

>  			set_bit(i, host->taps);
>  
>  		usleep_range(1000, 1200);
> -- 
> 2.11.0
> 

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]