Hi Wolfram,
On Sat, Sep 28, 2024 at 11:45 AM Wolfram Sang
<wsa+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The debug message could still report success when getting the channels
> was OK but configuring them failed. This actually caused a minor detour
> when debugging DMA problems, so make sure the success is only reported
> when the channels are really ready-to-use.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Thanks for your patch!
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sh_mmcif.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sh_mmcif.c
> @@ -439,14 +439,15 @@ static void sh_mmcif_request_dma(struct sh_mmcif_host *host)
> if (IS_ERR(host->chan_rx))
> host->chan_rx = NULL;
> }
> - dev_dbg(dev, "%s: got channel TX %p RX %p\n", __func__, host->chan_tx,
> - host->chan_rx);
This was not a real success indicator, which could indeed confuse
people, but an obfuscated NULL-pointer still prints as NULL, right?
> if (!host->chan_tx || !host->chan_rx ||
> sh_mmcif_dma_slave_config(host, host->chan_tx, DMA_MEM_TO_DEV) ||
> sh_mmcif_dma_slave_config(host, host->chan_rx, DMA_DEV_TO_MEM))
> goto error;
>
> + dev_dbg(dev, "%s: got channel TX %p RX %p\n", __func__, host->chan_tx,
> + host->chan_rx);
This means we no longer see a debug message in case only one DMA
channel could be requested, thus requiring manual addition of more code
to find out what was really wrong?
> +
> return;
>
> error:
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
