On 12/01/2022 10:31, Jiasheng Jiang wrote:
> Because of the possible failure of the dma_supported(), the
> dma_set_mask_and_coherent() may return error num.
> Therefore, it should be better to check it and return the error if
> fails.
> And since the sdhci_setup_host() has already checked the return value of
> the enable_dma, we need not check it in sdhci_resume_host() again.
>
> Fixes: 5552d7ad596c ("mmc: sdhci-of-esdhc: set proper dma mask for ls104x chips")
> Signed-off-by: Jiasheng Jiang <jiasheng@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Changelog
>
> v1 -> v2
>
> * Change 1. Remove the change of esdhc_of_resume and refine the commit
> * message.
> ---
> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c | 8 ++++++--
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c
> index a593b1fbd69e..0f3658b36513 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-of-esdhc.c
> @@ -524,12 +524,16 @@ static void esdhc_of_adma_workaround(struct sdhci_host *host, u32 intmask)
>
> static int esdhc_of_enable_dma(struct sdhci_host *host)
> {
> + int ret;
> u32 value;
> struct device *dev = mmc_dev(host->mmc);
>
> if (of_device_is_compatible(dev->of_node, "fsl,ls1043a-esdhc") ||
> - of_device_is_compatible(dev->of_node, "fsl,ls1046a-esdhc"))
> - dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(40));
> + of_device_is_compatible(dev->of_node, "fsl,ls1046a-esdhc")) {
> + ret = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(40));
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> + }
>
> value = sdhci_readl(host, ESDHC_DMA_SYSCTL);
>
>
