On 21/09/15 19:40, Grant Grundler wrote:
> Jon, Ulf,
> Can we first get the current implementation upstream and _then_ add
> more patches to it?
>
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 4:19 AM, Jon Hunter <jonathanh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> ...
>>>>> + for (i = 0; i < num_of_cmds; i++) {
>>>>> + err = __mmc_blk_ioctl_cmd(card, md, idata[i]);
>>>>> + if (err) {
>>>>> + mmc_put_card(card);
>>>>> + goto cmd_done;
>>>> Instead of exiting here, you should first copy to the user the data
>>>> and response of successful commands, mark the failed command as failed
>>>> and the remaining ones as "not executed".
>>>> This way, it will be easier for the user space application to find out
>>>> where the sequence failed. This especially true if some reverts are
>>>> needed.
>>>
>>> Yes that sounds like a sensible thing to do. I will incorporate that change.
>
> I also liked Gwendal's idea and incorporated that into our 3.18 kernel
> tree here:
> https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/#/c/299956
>
> (this is on top of Jon's most recently proposed patch - we'll align
> with what lands shortly)
>
> But as I've demonstrated, this can be a separate patch.
Yes that's fine with me. I have just posted a V4 to address Ulf's last
comment.
Cheers
Jon
--
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
