[PATCH RFC 2/3] sdio: pass unknown cis tuples to sdio drivers

* [PATCH RFC 2/3] sdio: pass unknown cis tuples to sdio drivers
@ 2009-09-07 18:47 ` Albert Herranz
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Albert Herranz @ 2009-09-07 18:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: bcm43xx-dev; +Cc: linux-mmc, linux-wireless

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 12 bytes --]




      

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: 0117-sdio-pass-unknown-cis-tuples-to-sdio-drivers.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch; name="0117-sdio-pass-unknown-cis-tuples-to-sdio-drivers.patch", Size: 3405 bytes --]

From bb888461dceb85e43b9c1fc9559f012dfeb19688 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Albert Herranz <albert_herranz@yahoo.es>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 21:24:11 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] sdio: pass unknown cis tuples to sdio drivers

Some manufactures provide vendor information in non-vendor specific CIS
tuples. For example, Broadcom uses an Extended Function tuple to provide
the MAC address on some of their network cards, as in the case of the
Nintendo Wii WLAN daughter card.

This patch allows passing correct tuples unknown to the SDIO core to
a matching SDIO driver instead of rejecting them and failing.

Signed-off-by: Albert Herranz <albert_herranz@yahoo.es>
---
 drivers/mmc/core/sdio_cis.c |   46 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
 1 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/sdio_cis.c b/drivers/mmc/core/sdio_cis.c
index 963f293..87934ac 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/core/sdio_cis.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/core/sdio_cis.c
@@ -123,8 +123,9 @@ static int cistpl_funce_func(struct sdio_func *func,
 	vsn = func->card->cccr.sdio_vsn;
 	min_size = (vsn == SDIO_SDIO_REV_1_00) ? 28 : 42;
 
+	/* let the SDIO driver take care of unknown tuples */
 	if (size < min_size || buf[0] != 1)
-		return -EINVAL;
+		return -EILSEQ;
 
 	/* TPLFE_MAX_BLK_SIZE */
 	func->max_blksize = buf[12] | (buf[13] << 8);
@@ -154,13 +155,7 @@ static int cistpl_funce(struct mmc_card *card, struct sdio_func *func,
 	else
 		ret = cistpl_funce_common(card, buf, size);
 
-	if (ret) {
-		printk(KERN_ERR "%s: bad CISTPL_FUNCE size %u "
-		       "type %u\n", mmc_hostname(card->host), size, buf[0]);
-		return ret;
-	}
-
-	return 0;
+	return ret;
 }
 
 typedef int (tpl_parse_t)(struct mmc_card *, struct sdio_func *,
@@ -253,21 +248,12 @@ static int sdio_read_cis(struct mmc_card *card, struct sdio_func *func)
 		for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(cis_tpl_list); i++)
 			if (cis_tpl_list[i].code == tpl_code)
 				break;
-		if (i >= ARRAY_SIZE(cis_tpl_list)) {
-			/* this tuple is unknown to the core */
-			this->next = NULL;
-			this->code = tpl_code;
-			this->size = tpl_link;
-			*prev = this;
-			prev = &this->next;
-			printk(KERN_DEBUG
-			       "%s: queuing CIS tuple 0x%02x length %u\n",
-			       mmc_hostname(card->host), tpl_code, tpl_link);
-		} else {
+		if (i < ARRAY_SIZE(cis_tpl_list)) {
 			const struct cis_tpl *tpl = cis_tpl_list + i;
 			if (tpl_link < tpl->min_size) {
 				printk(KERN_ERR
-				       "%s: bad CIS tuple 0x%02x (length = %u, expected >= %u)\n",
+				       "%s: bad CIS tuple 0x%02x"
+				       " (length = %u, expected >= %u)\n",
 				       mmc_hostname(card->host),
 				       tpl_code, tpl_link, tpl->min_size);
 				ret = -EINVAL;
@@ -275,7 +261,25 @@ static int sdio_read_cis(struct mmc_card *card, struct sdio_func *func)
 				ret = tpl->parse(card, func,
 						 this->data, tpl_link);
 			}
-			kfree(this);
+			/* already successfully parsed, not needed anymore */
+			if (!ret)
+				kfree(this);
+		} else {
+			/* unknown tuple */
+			ret = -EILSEQ;
+		}
+
+		if (ret == -EILSEQ) {
+			/* this tuple is unknown to the core */
+			this->next = NULL;
+			this->code = tpl_code;
+			this->size = tpl_link;
+			*prev = this;
+			prev = &this->next;
+			pr_debug("%s: queuing CIS tuple 0x%02x length %u\n",
+				 mmc_hostname(card->host), tpl_code, tpl_link);
+			/* keep on analyzing tuples */
+			ret = 0;
 		}
 
 		ptr += tpl_link;
-- 
1.6.0.4


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread