On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 at 09:46, Ludovic Barre <ludovic.Barre@xxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Ludovic Barre <ludovic.barre@xxxxxx> > > The "busy_detect_flag" is used to read/clear busy value of > mmci status. The "busy_detect_mask" is used to manage busy irq of > mmci mask. > For sdmmc variant, the 2 properties have not the same offset. > To clear the busyd0 status bit, we must add busy detect flag, > the mmci mask is not enough. > > Signed-off-by: Ludovic Barre <ludovic.barre@xxxxxx> Ludovic, again, apologies for the delay. > --- > drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c > index a040f54..3cd52e8 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c > @@ -1517,7 +1517,8 @@ static irqreturn_t mmci_irq(int irq, void *dev_id) > * to make sure that both start and end interrupts are always > * cleared one after the other. > */ > - status &= readl(host->base + MMCIMASK0); > + status &= readl(host->base + MMCIMASK0) | > + host->variant->busy_detect_flag; I think this is not entirely correct, because it would mean we check for busy even if we haven't unmasked the busy IRQ via the variant->busy_detect_mask. I suggest to store a new bool in the host (call it "busy_detect_unmasked" or whatever makes sense to you), to track whether we have unmasked the busy IRQ or not. Then take this flag into account, before ORing the value of host->variant->busy_detect_flag, according to above. > if (host->variant->busy_detect) > writel(status & ~host->variant->busy_detect_mask, > host->base + MMCICLEAR); > -- > 2.7.4 > Kind regards Uffe
