Maya Erez <merez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > @@ -1313,10 +1609,17 @@ static int mmc_blk_issue_rw_rq(struct mmc_queue
> *mq, struct request *rqc)
> > * A block was successfully transferred.
> > */
> > mmc_blk_reset_success(md, type);
> > - spin_lock_irq(&md->lock);
> > - ret = __blk_end_request(req, 0,
> > +
> > + if (mq_rq->packed_cmd != MMC_PACKED_NONE) {
> > + ret = mmc_blk_end_packed_req(mq, mq_rq);
> If a specific request in the packed request consistantly fails, there is
> nothing to stop us from sending the same packed request in an endless
> loop.
There is various error case. This patch reused the existing error handling.
What is that case we need to consider?
Best regards,
Seungwon Jeon
> > + break;
>
> Thanks,
> Maya Erez
> Consultant for Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
> Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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
--
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
