From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 2/5] mmc: sdhci: Split sdhci_add_host()
Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2016 12:21:28 +0300
Message-ID: <577B7C18.3030702@intel.com>
References: <1467120192-6479-1-git-send-email-adrian.hunter@intel.com>
 <1467120192-6479-3-git-send-email-adrian.hunter@intel.com>
 <577B77C1.10609@nvidia.com> <577B7A23.5030801@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mga09.intel.com ([134.134.136.24]:52143 "EHLO mga09.intel.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751150AbcGEJZm (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 5 Jul 2016 05:25:42 -0400
In-Reply-To: <577B7A23.5030801@intel.com>
Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org
To: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>, Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>, linux-mmc <linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>, Dong Aisheng <dongas86@gmail.com>, Dong Aisheng <aisheng.dong@nxp.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().