2011/9/21 NamJae Jeon <linkinjeon@xxxxxxxxx>:
> 2011/9/21 Murali Krishna Palnati <palnati.muralikrishna@xxxxxxxxx>:
>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2011 at 7:52 PM, NamJae Jeon <linkinjeon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> It may be no good choice that sw timer is on host driver. also I don't
>>> know what is different.
>>
>> It helps to have this functionality implemented at host controller
>> layer so that the host layer is informed about this. If we just end
>> the request from the MMC core layer, host controller driver doesnt
>> even kow about that and it remains in the same state processing the
>> request (that already got timed out at core layer). It is good to have
>> the host layer trigger this timeout, do necessary clean up and then
>> duly end the request by informing the core layer by calling
>> mmc_request_done().
>>
>> Let me put the question in this way. If the core layer times out
>> (because of wait_for_completion_timeout) then in the patch that you
>> have submitted, i dont see how the host layer knows about it.
>> Apologize, if i sound like a broken record saying the same thing again
>> and again.
>>
>
> I understand what you want. So I will add emergency_cleanup for host
> driver like this.
> struct mmc_host_ops {
> ................
> .................
> void (*emergency_cleanup)(struct mmc_host *host);
>
> }
>
> When timeout error happen, mmc core will call this function as soon as
> sending stop cmd.
> And when timeout error happen by wait_for_completion_timeout, calling
> mmc_request_done is not needed.
>
> Thanks.
>
I'll follow the opinion of chris.
Thanks.
--
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
