Does the double "recovery" in the subject intentional? Thanks, Avri > Hi > > Some issues have been found with CQE error recovery. Here are some fixes. > > As of V2, the alternative implementation for the patch from Kornel Dulęba: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mmc/e7c12e07-7540-47ea-8891- > 2cec73d58df1@xxxxxxxxx/T/#u > > is now included, see patch 6 "mmc: cqhci: Fix task clearing in CQE error > recovery") > > Please also note ->post_disable() seems to be missing from > cqhci_recovery_start(). It would be good if ->post_disable() users could > check if this needs attention. > > > Changes in V2: > > mmc: cqhci: Fix task clearing in CQE error recovery > New patch > > mmc: cqhci: Warn of halt or task clear failure > Add fixes and stable tags > > > Adrian Hunter (6): > mmc: block: Do not lose cache flush during CQE error recovery > mmc: cqhci: Increase recovery halt timeout > mmc: block: Be sure to wait while busy in CQE error recovery > mmc: block: Retry commands in CQE error recovery > mmc: cqhci: Warn of halt or task clear failure > mmc: cqhci: Fix task clearing in CQE error recovery > > drivers/mmc/core/block.c | 2 ++ > drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 9 +++++++-- > drivers/mmc/host/cqhci-core.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++----------------- > ----- > 3 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-) > > > Regards > Adrian
