On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 10:13:52AM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote: > On 06/04/16 09:46, Peter Chen wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 05, 2016 at 04:48:19PM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote: > >> Peter, > >> > >> On 05/04/16 15:52, Roger Quadros wrote: > >>> Peter, > >>> > >>> On 05/04/16 11:52, Peter Chen wrote: > >>>> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 12:41:19PM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote: > >>>>> If usb/otg-fsm.h and usb/composite.h are included together > >>>>> then it results in the build warning [1]. > >>>>> > >>>>> Prevent that by using dev_vdbg() instead. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> After considering it more, I think it may not be a good solution > >>>> that we delete VDBG at one header file, but keep it at another > >>>> one. In future, we may add VDBG at another file, and cause the > >>>> same problem. In fact, I find VDBG is defined at several files > >>>> in USB folder (and only at USB folder), I plan to replace them > >>>> with standard one (dev_vdbg) together. > >>> > >>> OK, please ignore this patch then. > >> > >> On second thoughts can you please retain this patch and post the > >> VDBG removal from composite.h cleanup separately? > >> > > > > I find the struct usb_otg has a struct device pointer, and you changes > > all fsm stuffs under struct usb_otg (like otg.fsm) in your later patches, > > then, would you please refine this patch that just using otg->dev for > > print and move VDBG to phy-fsl-usb.c, of course, you need to move this > > patch in that patch series. > > OK. I'll rework this patch and include it in the otg series. > I have already queued your 1st and 2nd patch at my tree. -- Best Regards, Peter Chen -- 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
