From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11CF7C33C99 for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 07:21:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBE68207E0 for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 07:21:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="sBK7wzvo" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727185AbgAGHU5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jan 2020 02:20:57 -0500 Received: from lelv0143.ext.ti.com ([198.47.23.248]:54456 "EHLO lelv0143.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725781AbgAGHU4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Jan 2020 02:20:56 -0500 Received: from lelv0265.itg.ti.com ([10.180.67.224]) by lelv0143.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0077KiOm005644; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 01:20:44 -0600 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1578381644; bh=BNhB0QYJdnTNKSIqndUpxLZ1sEMIsh0Psb5ghyCVu+M=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=sBK7wzvoGwFHA11fk7gIMQf/8nPtBhOEfXzdpeK80AL7nNx3A3JaDNvy404X+kJNr 7bh7MZSm2xZXhiA7MaKoBELuu5n6P7KfVMIX6bEyj8qchymhrAX+HE1KjAq4OVlKUx QnEIk8biuH+RnA33DcXM9kj2f7mUw79O9sccGXOw= Received: from DFLE100.ent.ti.com (dfle100.ent.ti.com [10.64.6.21]) by lelv0265.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 0077KiLJ097488 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 7 Jan 2020 01:20:44 -0600 Received: from DFLE115.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.36) by DFLE100.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1847.3; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 01:20:44 -0600 Received: from fllv0040.itg.ti.com (10.64.41.20) by DFLE115.ent.ti.com (10.64.6.36) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1847.3 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 01:20:44 -0600 Received: from [172.24.190.4] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by fllv0040.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0077KeUj039368; Tue, 7 Jan 2020 01:20:41 -0600 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/11] mmc: sdhci: Factor out some operations set to their own functions To: Baolin Wang CC: , LKML , , linux-mmc , , Adrian Hunter , , , Ulf Hansson , References: <20200106110133.13791-1-faiz_abbas@ti.com> <20200106110133.13791-3-faiz_abbas@ti.com> From: Faiz Abbas Message-ID: <27fded85-d195-0a82-899a-bb6e727258dc@ti.com> Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2020 12:52:13 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org Hi Baolin, On 07/01/20 12:04 pm, Baolin Wang wrote: > Hi Faiz, > > On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 7:01 PM Faiz Abbas wrote: >> >> In preparation for adding external dma support, factor out data initialization, >> block info and mrq_done to their own functions. >> >> Signed-off-by: Faiz Abbas >> --- >> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c | 96 +++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- >> 1 file changed, 55 insertions(+), 41 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c >> index 1b1c26da3fe0..f6999054abcf 100644 >> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c >> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c >> @@ -1025,18 +1025,9 @@ static void sdhci_set_timeout(struct sdhci_host *host, struct mmc_command *cmd) >> } >> } >> >> -static void sdhci_prepare_data(struct sdhci_host *host, struct mmc_command *cmd) >> +static void sdhci_initialize_data(struct sdhci_host *host, >> + struct mmc_data *data) >> { >> - struct mmc_data *data = cmd->data; >> - >> - host->data_timeout = 0; >> - >> - if (sdhci_data_line_cmd(cmd)) >> - sdhci_set_timeout(host, cmd); >> - >> - if (!data) >> - return; >> - >> WARN_ON(host->data); >> >> /* Sanity checks */ >> @@ -1048,6 +1039,36 @@ static void sdhci_prepare_data(struct sdhci_host *host, struct mmc_command *cmd) >> host->data_early = 0; >> host->data->bytes_xfered = 0; >> > > Can you remove above redundant blank line? Ok. > >> +} >> + >> +static inline void sdhci_set_block_info(struct sdhci_host *host, >> + struct mmc_data *data) >> +{ >> + > > Ditto. Ok. > > Otherwise, please add my tested tag if feel free. > > Tested-by: Baolin Wang Which platform did you test this on? Thanks, Faiz