On 25/06/21 10:01 pm, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> Move the call to clear the retune flags into mmc_retune_enable() to
> ensure they are always cleared. With current code, there is no
> functional change. But it is more future-proof this way.
To me they seem conceptually separate functions.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> After reviewing my own code, I thought this is even a tad better. What
> do you guys think? Based on the series "[PATCH 0/3] mmc: avoid vicious
> circle when retuning", of course.
>
> drivers/mmc/core/core.c | 6 ++----
> drivers/mmc/core/host.c | 1 +
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
> index 84f39a59a28e..b039dcff17f8 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/core.c
> @@ -937,13 +937,11 @@ int mmc_execute_tuning(struct mmc_card *card)
>
> err = host->ops->execute_tuning(host, opcode);
>
> - if (err) {
> + if (err)
> pr_err("%s: tuning execution failed: %d\n",
> mmc_hostname(host), err);
> - } else {
> - mmc_retune_clear(host);
> + else
> mmc_retune_enable(host);
> - }
>
> return err;
> }
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/core/host.c b/drivers/mmc/core/host.c
> index 52d37587cf45..8ca1db6413f8 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/core/host.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/core/host.c
> @@ -101,6 +101,7 @@ void mmc_unregister_host_class(void)
> */
> void mmc_retune_enable(struct mmc_host *host)
> {
> + mmc_retune_clear(host);
> host->can_retune = 1;
> if (host->retune_period)
> mod_timer(&host->retune_timer,
>
