Re: [PATCH RFC 2/5] mmc: sdhci: Split sdhci_add_host()

[Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>]

On 05/07/16 12:13, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 05/07/16 12:02, Jon Hunter wrote:
>>
>> On 28/06/16 14:23, Adrian Hunter wrote:
>>> Split sdhci-add_host() in order to further our objective to make
>>> sdhci into a library.
>>
>> s/sdhci-add_host/sdhci_add_host
> 
> Thanks I'll make that change
> 
>>
>>> The split divides code that sets up mmc and sdhci parameters, from
>>> code that actually activates things - such as tasklet initialization,
>>> requesting the irq, and adding (and starting) the host.
>>>
>>> This gives drivers an opportunity to change various settings before
>>> committing to start the host.
>>>
>>> Drivers can continue to call sdhci_add_host() but drivers that want
>>> to take advantage of the split instead call sdhci_setup_host() followed
>>> by __sdhci_add_host().
>>
>> If sdhci_setup_host() is successful, but then the subsequent call to
>> __sdhci_add_host() fails, then what should be called to clean-up? Does
>> not look like we can still call sdhci_remove_host() in this case.
> 
> Nothing needs to be called because __sdhci_add_host() cleans up for
> sdhci_setup_host() and itself.

I should have written nothing extra needs to be called because you still
need to free the host (i.e. call sdhci_free_host()), but that is the same
whether you use sdhci_add_host() or sdhci_setup_host()+__sdhci_add_host().