From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kuninori Morimoto Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2014 01:37:46 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10 v2 resend] mmc: block: add block number limitation flag for multiple block read Message-Id: <87bnr6pva0.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@gmail.com> List-Id: References: <87simtenpi.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> <87pphxe2q0.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com> <53AD638C.5060907@renesas.com> <87egxehsec.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@gmail.com> <8761hk7wgy.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@gmail.com> <874mx47wf9.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@gmail.com> <87fvgltmnn.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@gmail.com> <87tx50sxe9.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <87tx50sxe9.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Kuninori Morimoto Cc: Ulf Hansson , Simon , Chris Ball , Ian Molton , Morimoto , Magnus , Linux-SH , linux-mmc Hi Ulf again What do you think this idea ? We can move MMC_CAP2_NO_MULTI_READ from host.h to driver side > /* > * this can replace MMC_CAP2_NO_MULTI_READ ? > */ > void no_multi_read_fixup(struct mmc_blk_request *brq, > struct request *req) > { > if (rq_data_dir(req) = READ) > brq->data.blocks = 1; > } > > /* > * we can use this instead of MMC_CAP2_2BLKS_LIMIT ? > */ > void two_block_limit_read_fixup(struct mmc_blk_request *brq, > struct request *req) > { > if ((rq_data_dir(req) = READ) && > (brq->data.blocks = 2)) > brq->data.blocks = 1; > } > > static void mmc_blk_rw_rq_prep(xxxx) > { > ... > if (brq->data.blocks > 1) { > ... > > if (card->host->host_data_fixup) > card->host->host_data_fixup(brq, req) > } > ... > } Best regards --- Kuninori Morimoto