On Fri, 30 May 2014, Dan Williams wrote:
> >> --- a/drivers/usb/core/driver.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/usb/core/driver.c
> >> @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@
> >> #include <linux/usb/quirks.h>
> >> #include <linux/usb/hcd.h>
> >>
> >> -#include "usb.h"
> >> +#include "hub.h"
> >
> > Why on earth would something like this be needed? You didn't remove
> > anything from usb.h.
> >
> > All the changes in this patch should be internal to the hub driver.
> > Other .c files should not be involved.
>
> usb_unlocked_disable_lpm() is defined in hub_pm.c and called from
> hub.c driver.c and message.c. I was moving fast and just centralized
> all declarations hub/hub_pm.c defined routines in hub.h. Would you
> rather have one-off definitions in usb.h?
It's best if the existing declarations in include/linux/usb.h are left
alone.
> >> --- a/drivers/usb/core/usb.h
> >> +++ b/drivers/usb/core/usb.h
> >> @@ -111,6 +111,11 @@ static inline int usb_set_usb2_hardware_lpm(struct usb_device *udev, int enable)
> >> {
> >> return 0;
> >> }
> >> +
> >> +static inline int usb_remote_wakeup(struct usb_device *dev)
> >> +{
> >> + return 0;
> >> +}
> >> #endif
> >
> > It seems strange for this to be here. Why not move all the
> > declarations of usb_remote_wakeup into hub.h?
>
> It seems I randomly made the opposite choice here, but the same
> question still stands about one-off hub/hub_pm.c declarations in
> usb.h.
In general, I think drivers/usb/core/hub.h should include things that
are used only in hub.c, hub_pm.c, and port.c. Things used in other
source files should go in core/usb.h.
Alan Stern
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
