On Sun, 5 Sep 2010 11:05:38 +0200
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> After discovering a problem in regulator reference counting I
> took Mark Brown's advice to move the reference count into the
> MMC core by making the regulator status a member of
> struct mmc_host.
>
>
> ...
>
> -static inline void pxamci_set_power(struct pxamci_host *host, unsigned int vdd)
> +static inline void pxamci_set_power(struct pxamci_host *host,
> + unsigned char power_mode,
> + unsigned int vdd)
> {
> int on;
>
> -#ifdef CONFIG_REGULATOR
> - if (host->vcc)
> - mmc_regulator_set_ocr(host->vcc, vdd);
> -#endif
> + if (host->vcc) {
> + int ret;
> +
> + if (power_mode == MMC_POWER_UP)
> + ret = mmc_regulator_set_ocr(host->mmc, host->vcc, vdd);
> + else if (power_mode == MMC_POWER_OFF)
> + ret = mmc_regulator_set_ocr(host->mmc, host->vcc, 0);
> + }
There's no point in copying the return value into a local then ignoring
it. mmc_regulator_set_ocr() can return a negative errno so we should
test for that, clean up and propagate the error.
If we really do deliberately ignore the error then there should be a
code comment which excuses this behaviour and perhaps a warning printk.
The same comments apply to mmci_set_ios().
omap_hsmmc_1_set_power() gets it right.
Why doesn't omap_hsmmc_23_set_sleep() run .before_set_reg() and
.after_set_reg()?
>
> ...
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
