Hello. On 05-05-2011 15:51, Adrian Hunter wrote:
From: Sudhir Bera <ext-sudhir.bera@xxxxxxxxx>
In fact the no_off check here will not be hit because 'omap_hsmmc_disabled_to_sleep()' won't schedule a deeper disable in the no_off case.
Signed-off-by: Sudhir Bera <ext-sudhir.bera@xxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@xxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c | 7 +++---- 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c b/drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c index bab25ff..bd52849 100644 --- a/drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/omap_hsmmc.c @@ -1852,14 +1852,13 @@ static int omap_hsmmc_sleep_to_off(struct omap_hsmmc_host *host) return 0; if (mmc_slot(host).no_off) - return 0; + goto out; if (!((host->mmc->caps& MMC_CAP_NONREMOVABLE) || mmc_slot(host).card_detect || (mmc_slot(host).get_cover_state && mmc_slot(host).get_cover_state(host->dev, host->slot_id)))) { - mmc_release_host(host->mmc); - return 0; + goto out; }
This has become a single statement, so {} shpould be removed, no? checkpatch.pl probably warns here?..
WBR, Sergei -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html