Recycling the same variable in an x=x+1 fashion may seem
clever here but it makes the code terse and hard to follow
for humans. Introduce a new_areq and old_areq variable so
we see what is going on.
Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/mmc/core/block.c | 14 ++++++++------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/block.c b/drivers/mmc/core/block.c
index 4bbb3d16c09b..f3e0c778cdbd 100644
--- a/drivers/mmc/core/block.c
+++ b/drivers/mmc/core/block.c
@@ -1631,7 +1631,8 @@ static int mmc_blk_issue_rw_rq(struct mmc_queue *mq, struct request *rqc)
enum mmc_blk_status status;
struct mmc_queue_req *mq_rq;
struct request *req;
- struct mmc_async_req *areq;
+ struct mmc_async_req *new_areq;
+ struct mmc_async_req *old_areq;
if (!rqc && !mq->mqrq_prev->req)
return 0;
@@ -1651,11 +1652,12 @@ static int mmc_blk_issue_rw_rq(struct mmc_queue *mq, struct request *rqc)
}
mmc_blk_rw_rq_prep(mq->mqrq_cur, card, 0, mq);
- areq = &mq->mqrq_cur->mmc_active;
+ new_areq = &mq->mqrq_cur->mmc_active;
} else
- areq = NULL;
- areq = mmc_start_req(card->host, areq, &status);
- if (!areq) {
+ new_areq = NULL;
+
+ old_areq = mmc_start_req(card->host, new_areq, &status);
+ if (!old_areq) {
/*
* We have just put the first request into the pipeline
* and there is nothing more to do until it is
@@ -1670,7 +1672,7 @@ static int mmc_blk_issue_rw_rq(struct mmc_queue *mq, struct request *rqc)
* An asynchronous request has been completed and we proceed
* to handle the result of it.
*/
- mq_rq = container_of(areq, struct mmc_queue_req, mmc_active);
+ mq_rq = container_of(old_areq, struct mmc_queue_req, mmc_active);
brq = &mq_rq->brq;
req = mq_rq->req;
type = rq_data_dir(req) == READ ? MMC_BLK_READ : MMC_BLK_WRITE;
--
2.9.3
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-block" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
