On 10 August 2017 at 14:08, Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Add CQE host operations, capabilities, and host members. > > Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx> Thanks, applied for next! However with some minor comments, explained below. [...] > > + /* Command Queue Engine (CQE) support */ > + const struct mmc_cqe_ops *cqe_ops; > + void *cqe_private; > + /* > + * Notify uppers layers (e.g. mmc block driver) that CQE needs recovery > + * due to an error associated with the mmc_request. > + */ Thanks for adding the explanation. > + void (*cqe_recovery_notifier)(struct mmc_host *, > + struct mmc_request *); Normally we don't put callbacks in the struct mmc_host that someone else than the host driver should assign - so this feels a bit upside down. Is there any reason to why you didn't want to add a new API? Something like mmc_cqe_recover(), which the host driver could call. > + int cqe_qdepth; > + bool cqe_enabled; > + bool cqe_on; > + > unsigned long private[0] ____cacheline_aligned; > }; > > -- > 1.9.1 > 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
