On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 09:37:51AM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
>> On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 15:29 +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2011 at 04:06:41PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote:
>>>> The patch "mmc: core: move ->request() call from atomic context",
>>>> is the reason to why this change is possible. This simplifies the
>>>> error handling code execution path quite a lot and potentially also
>>>> fixes some error handling hang problems.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> This doesn't look right:
>>>
>>> void mmc_request_done(struct mmc_host *host, struct mmc_request *mrq)
>>> {
>>> if (err && cmd->retries) {
>>> host->ops->request(host, mrq);
>>>
>
> This is NOT how it looks at mmc-next. You need to test with Adrian
> Hunters patch which the commit refers two.
In that case, how can I take the patch to mmci if it depends on something
in another tree?
--
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
