> > Ulf, I'd think that mmc_abort_tuning() should be named
> > mmc_abort_tuning_cmd() instead. Because we don't actually abort the
> > tuning as a whole in this function. What do you think? I can prepare a
> > patch if you agree.
> 
> Good point.
> 
> I have no strong opinion, but perhaps mmc_send_abort_tuning() is more
> consistent with other function names?

Ack. I will prepare it!