On Tue, 26 Sep 2017, Russell King wrote:
> Convert the shutdown method to use the device_driver shutdown function
> pointer rather than a private bus-type shutdown. This is the only user
> for SA1111 bus types, so having the support code in the bus doesn't
> make any sense.
>
> Signed-off-by: Russell King <rmk+kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/usb/host/ohci-sa1111.c | 5 +++--
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-sa1111.c b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-sa1111.c
> index 9aa4fe1800b9..82842918cb0c 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-sa1111.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-sa1111.c
> @@ -247,8 +247,9 @@ static int ohci_hcd_sa1111_remove(struct sa1111_dev *dev)
> return 0;
> }
>
> -static void ohci_hcd_sa1111_shutdown(struct sa1111_dev *dev)
> +static void ohci_hcd_sa1111_shutdown(struct device *_dev)
> {
> + struct sa1111_dev *dev = to_sa1111_device(_dev);
> struct usb_hcd *hcd = sa1111_get_drvdata(dev);
>
> if (test_bit(HCD_FLAG_HW_ACCESSIBLE, &hcd->flags)) {
> @@ -261,9 +262,9 @@ static struct sa1111_driver ohci_hcd_sa1111_driver = {
> .drv = {
> .name = "sa1111-ohci",
> .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> + .shutdown = ohci_hcd_sa1111_shutdown,
> },
> .devid = SA1111_DEVID_USB,
> .probe = ohci_hcd_sa1111_probe,
> .remove = ohci_hcd_sa1111_remove,
> - .shutdown = ohci_hcd_sa1111_shutdown,
> };
I have no objection to this patch. But it leads me to wonder why you
don't get rid of the SA1111 bus type entirely, rather than keeping it
just for the sake of one driver?
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
