Hi,
If a write operation fails, shouldnt we still check for the card
state to be 'ready to accept next data'?
This question is because I have noticed that some (broken) cards
fail the write command, and the immediately issued subsequent
commands also fail since the card state was never checked before
sending these commands.
(There was a discussion about these cards at the thread: "MMC:
CRC Errors with 2GB cards)
diff -a -u -p -r1.2 block.c
--- drivers/mmc/card/block.c 22 Oct 2007 10:39:44 -0000 1.2
+++ drivers/mmc/card/block.c 8 Nov 2007 06:55:37 -0000
@@ -206,6 +206,7 @@ static int mmc_blk_issue_rq(struct mmc_q
struct mmc_card *card = md->queue.card;
struct mmc_blk_request brq;
int ret = 1, sg_pos, data_size;
+ int data_error = 0;
mmc_claim_host(card->host);
@@ -282,19 +283,19 @@ static int mmc_blk_issue_rq(struct mmc_q
if (brq.cmd.error) {
printk(KERN_ERR "%s: error %d sending read/write command\n",
req->rq_disk->disk_name, brq.cmd.error);
- goto cmd_err;
+ data_error = 1;
}
if (brq.data.error) {
printk(KERN_ERR "%s: error %d transferring data\n",
req->rq_disk->disk_name, brq.data.error);
- goto cmd_err;
+ data_error = 1;
}
if (brq.stop.error) {
printk(KERN_ERR "%s: error %d sending stop command\n",
req->rq_disk->disk_name, brq.stop.error);
- goto cmd_err;
+ data_error = 1;
}
if (rq_data_dir(req) != READ) {
@@ -320,6 +321,9 @@ static int mmc_blk_issue_rq(struct mmc_q
goto cmd_err;
#endif
}
+
+ if (data_error == 1)
+ goto cmd_err;
/*
* A block was successfully transferred.
Thanks,
Roopesh.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]