Looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Subhash Jadavani <subhashj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On 1/30/2013 12:00 PM, Seungwon Jeon wrote:
> Hi Konstantin.
>
> Could you check this patch with [2/2]?
> [PATCH 2/2] mmc: block: don't start new request when the card is removed
>
> mmcqd is often sleeping with acquiring the claim(mmc_claim_host) when a card is removed.
> As a result, mmc_rescan can be blocked for the insertion of a card newly. It's a dead lock.
>
> Thanks,
> Seungwon Jeon
>
> On Tuesday, January 22, 2013, Seungwon Jeon wrote:
>> This patch is derived from 'mmc: fix async request mechanism ...'.
>> According as async transfer, a request is handled with twice mmc_start_req.
>> When the card is removed, the request is actually not issued in the first
>> mmc_start_req [__mmc_start_data_req]. And then mmc_wait_for_data_req_done
>> will come in the next mmc_start_req. But there is no event for completions.
>> wake_up_interruptible is needed in __mmc_start_data_req for the case of
>> removed card.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Seungwon Jeon <tgih.jun@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 1 +
>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
>> index 8b3a122..997b257 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
>> @@ -350,6 +350,7 @@ static int __mmc_start_data_req(struct mmc_host *host, struct mmc_request *mrq)
>> mrq->host = host;
>> if (mmc_card_removed(host->card)) {
>> mrq->cmd->error = -ENOMEDIUM;
>> + mmc_wait_data_done(mrq);
>> return -ENOMEDIUM;
>> }
>> mmc_start_request(host, mrq);
>> --
>> 1.7.0.4
>
> --
> 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
