On 21 August 2016 at 06:22, Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> We should not use packed command before we verify
> it's valid. So let's move the assignment of idx
> after the check.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> drivers/mmc/card/block.c | 4 +++-
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/card/block.c b/drivers/mmc/card/block.c
> index 48a5dd7..11d3046 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/card/block.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/card/block.c
> @@ -1883,11 +1883,13 @@ static int mmc_blk_end_packed_req(struct mmc_queue_req *mq_rq)
> {
> struct request *prq;
> struct mmc_packed *packed = mq_rq->packed;
> - int idx = packed->idx_failure, i = 0;
> + int idx, i = 0;
> int ret = 0;
>
> BUG_ON(!packed);
>
> + idx = packed->idx_failure;
> +
Instead of changing this, may I suggest we try to implement better
error handling - if needed.
I don't think a BUG_ON() is actually what should be used here.
> while (!list_empty(&packed->list)) {
> prq = list_entry_rq(packed->list.next);
> if (idx == i) {
> --
> 2.3.7
>
>
Kind regards
Uffe
> --
> 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
