On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 04:08:19PM +0800, B42677@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: Haijun Zhang <Haijun.Zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> A-003500: False ADMA Error might be reported when ADMA is used for
> multiple block read command with Stop at Block Gap. If PROCTL[SABGREQ]
> is set when the particular block's data is received by the System side
> logic before entire block(with CRC) data is received by the SD side logic,
> and also if ADMA descriptor line is fetched at the same time,
> then DMA engine might report false ADMA error. eSDHC might not be able
> to Continue(PROCTL[CREQ]=1)after Stop at Block Gap.
> This issue will impact the eSDHC IP VVN2.3.
>
>
> Signed-off-by: Haijun Zhang <Haijun.Zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Jerry Huang <Chang-Ming.Huang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: Anton Vorontsov <cbouatmailru@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
[...]
> +static void esdhci_of_adma_workaround(struct sdhci_host *host, u32 intmask)
> +{
> + u32 tmp = in_be32(host->ioaddr + SDHCI_SLOT_INT_STATUS);
> +
> + tmp = (tmp & SDHCI_VENDOR_VER_MASK) >> SDHCI_VENDOR_VER_SHIFT;
> + if (tmp == VENDOR_V_23) {
> + if ((intmask & SDHCI_INT_DATA_END) &&
> + (intmask & SDHCI_INT_BLK_GAP)) {
By inverting the condition, you could greatly reduce the
indentation. I.e. return early if the condition is false, and
do the rest outside of the if block. (Plus, one if statement
would be enough, no need to nest them.)
Thanks,
Anton.
--
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
