Hello Linus, On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 9:54 AM, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 5:07 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas > <javier@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> + *gpio_invert = gpiod_is_active_low(desc); >>> + >> >> The old code set gpio_inv_cd if (!(flags & OF_GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW)) so the >> above should be: >> >> *gpio_invert = !gpiod_is_active_low(desc); > > Argh, done it like this in v2, but isn't that variable name a lie then? > If it's active low then it's inverted, but if it's not active low it's not > inverted right... > Right, the logic is confusing at the very least. I'm not familiar with this code though, I just was bitten by this issue :-) > Sigh, atleast we have restored the semantics, but maybe we need > to comb over this again. > Agreed. For completeness I just tested v2 of your patch and it makes the card detection work again. Thanks a lot for all your help! > Yours, > Linus Walleij Best regards, Javier -- 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
