On Fri, 2015-06-26 at 14:09 +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote: > On 26/06/15 14:00, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote: > > On Fri, 2015-06-26 at 13:19 +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote: > > > On 26/06/15 13:00, Ivan T. Ivanov wrote: > > > > Controller could have BROKEN_CARD_DETECTION quirk set, but drivers > > > > could use GPIO to detect card present state. Let, when defined, GPIO > > > > take precedence, so drivers could properly detect card state and not > > > > use polling. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Ivan T. Ivanov ivanov@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > --- > > > > drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c | 11 +++++++---- > > > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c > > > > index bc14452..8bafb9f 100644 > > > > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c > > > > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci.c > > > > @@ -1601,15 +1601,18 @@ static int sdhci_do_get_cd(struct sdhci_host *host) > > > > if (host->flags & SDHCI_DEVICE_DEAD) > > > > return 0; > > > > > > > > + /* > > > > + * Try slot gpio detect, if defined it take precedence > > > > + * over build in controller functionality > > > > + */ > > > > + if (!IS_ERR_VALUE(gpio_cd)) > > > > + return !!gpio_cd; > > > > + > > > > > > You've also put it above the MMC_CAP_NONREMOVABLE check which doesn't seem > > > right. > > > > > > > Probably, but what are the chances that this is valid GIO for non-removable cards. > > I could rework it if you insist. > > It is nicer not to have to think "what are the chances", and nicer that the > logic is strictly correct, so yes please. > Sure, will do. Thanks, Ivan -- 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
