[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <MN2PR04MB69916E18CB87074C1189D82CFCBB0@MN2PR04MB6991.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 08:43:01 +0000
From: Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>
To: Chaotian Jing <chaotian.jing@...iatek.com>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
CC: Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.de>,
YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>, Chris Boot <bootc@...tc.net>,
Zachary Hays <zhays@...mark.com>,
"linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
"srv_heupstream@...iatek.com" <srv_heupstream@...iatek.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 1/2] mmc: block: make the card_busy_detect() more
generic
>
> to use the card_busy_detect() to wait card levae the programming state,
> there may be do not have the "struct request *" argument.
Maybe reword the commit log to make it more clear:
A tad optimization, removing the "struct request *" argument from card_busy_detect().
It's not really needed there, and will prove its worth in the next patch,
Where we'll use it in __mmc_blk_ioctl_cmd where struct request is not available.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chaotian Jing <chaotian.jing@...iatek.com>
Reviewed-by: Avri Altman <avri.altman@....com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists