Hello Ulf,

On 01/30/2015 12:17 PM, Ulf Hansson wrote:

quoted

 };

@@ -39,6 +42,11 @@ static void mmc_pwrseq_simple_pre_power_on(struct mmc_host *host)
        struct mmc_pwrseq_simple *pwrseq = container_of(host->pwrseq,
                                        struct mmc_pwrseq_simple, pwrseq);

+       if (!IS_ERR(pwrseq->ext_clk)) {

This should be:

if (!IS_ERR(pwrseq->ext_clk) && !pwrseq->clk_enabled) {

Oh, I thought that it was not possible to enter mmc_pwrseq_pre_power_on()
twice without a prior call to mmc_pwrseq_power_off() but I guess I didn't
read the MMC core code carefully...
 

quoted

+               clk_prepare_enable(pwrseq->ext_clk);
+               pwrseq->clk_enabled = true;
+       }
+
        mmc_pwrseq_simple_set_gpios_value(pwrseq, 1);
 }

@@ -50,6 +58,19 @@ static void mmc_pwrseq_simple_post_power_on(struct mmc_host *host)
        mmc_pwrseq_simple_set_gpios_value(pwrseq, 0);
 }

+static void mmc_pwrseq_simple_power_off(struct mmc_host *host)
+{
+       struct mmc_pwrseq_simple *pwrseq = container_of(host->pwrseq,
+                                       struct mmc_pwrseq_simple, pwrseq);
+
+       mmc_pwrseq_simple_set_gpios_value(pwrseq, 1);
+
+       if (pwrseq->clk_enabled) {

I changed this as well, but that was just to make code clearer.

if (!IS_ERR(pwrseq->ext_clk) && pwrseq->clk_enabled) {

Yeah, if IS_ERR(pwrseq->ext_clk) then clk_enabled will always be false but I
agree that the change makes the code to be more consistent.

quoted

As I stated in the response to he coverletter for the patchset, this
patch is applied for next with above changes.

Thanks!

Thanks a lot for your help and for fixing these things!

Kind regards
Uffe

Best regards,
Javier