From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757472Ab0JZCEX (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Oct 2010 22:04:23 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f46.google.com ([209.85.161.46]:46864 "EHLO mail-fx0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753145Ab0JZCEW (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Oct 2010 22:04:22 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=Sx564uvBe09UKbUTtzHdplsCYpoe2J8tdlRQdZ8mqY5gHmraKywineIKR/aoOt+WEt nGrmQYiuHeWNWcz5zhzazaurhq+X4cHYfKf4Mv+rKY8ef89ulCG8y/aI8fmpMqcfoZVE v32YCRmLnd/8PddJ0RrnThftoK2Vvgt0PHAu8= Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/29] memstick: core: stop passing pointer to card->current_mrq From: Maxim Levitsky To: Alex Dubov Cc: Andrew Morton , LKML In-Reply-To: <254156.53235.qm@web37608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <254156.53235.qm@web37608.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 04:04:16 +0200 Message-ID: <1288058656.4024.129.camel@maxim-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2010-10-25 at 08:41 -0700, Alex Dubov wrote: > > --- On Fri, 22/10/10, Maxim Levitsky wrote: > > > From: Maxim Levitsky > > Subject: [PATCH 13/29] memstick: core: stop passing pointer to card->current_mrq > > To: "Alex Dubov" > > Cc: "Andrew Morton" , "LKML" , "Maxim Levitsky" > > Received: Friday, 22 October, 2010, 4:53 PM > > This cleans up a lot of code and > > makes the assumption > > (*mrq == &card->current_mrq) official. > > > > Signed-off-by: Maxim Levitsky > > --- > > Unfortunately, the description does not match the patch. > While the main optimization (merging req and card arguments for good) is > fully reasonable given the posterior knowledge of MSPro evolution, this > patch introduces some functional changes as well, which can not be > considered to be a pure cleanup. Agreed, some stuff slipped to that patch, will split. > Some WARN_ONs also appear to be misplaced: > > > if (msb->block_req) { > > - mspro_block_complete_req(card, (*mrq)->error); > > + mspro_block_complete_req(card, mrq->error); > > error = mspro_block_issue_req(card, false); > > > > - if (!msb->block_req) { > > + if (error) { > > + WARN_ON(msb->block_req); Nope that on purpose. If mspro_block_issue_req returns error, the msb->block_req must be NULL. Best regards, Maxim Levitsky