On Tuesday 02 April 2013 06:10 PM, Vivek Gautam wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 04:04:01PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote:
On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 07:24:00PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote:
Adding APIs to handle runtime power management on PHY
devices. PHY consumers may need to wake-up/suspend PHYs
when they work across autosuspend.
Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
include/linux/usb/phy.h | 141 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 files changed, 141 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/usb/phy.h b/include/linux/usb/phy.h
index 6b5978f..01bf9c1 100644
--- a/include/linux/usb/phy.h
+++ b/include/linux/usb/phy.h
@@ -297,4 +297,145 @@ static inline const char *usb_phy_type_string(enum usb_phy_type type)
return "UNKNOWN PHY TYPE";
}
}
+
+static inline void usb_phy_autopm_enable(struct usb_phy *x)
+{
+ if (!x || !x->dev) {
+ dev_err(x->dev, "no PHY or attached device available\n");
+ return;
+ }
wrong indentation, also, I'm not sure we should allow calls with NULL
pointers. Perhaps a WARN() so we get API offenders early enough ?
True, bad coding style :-(
We should be handling dev_err with a NULL pointer.
Will just keep here:
if (WARN_ON(!x->dev))
return .... ;
right, but I guess:
if (WARN(!x || !x->dev, "Invalid parameters\n"))
return -EINVAL;
would be better ??
btw, shouldn't it be IS_ERR(x)?
Thanks
Kishon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
