On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 08:31:14AM +0200, Mathias Nyman wrote: > On 28.1.2021 5.38, Howard Yen wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 10:19 PM Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 05:32:58PM +0200, Mathias Nyman wrote: > >>> > >>> Ok, before adding hooks like this I think we need to see how they are used. > >>> Do you have the rest of the patches that go on top of this series? > >>> > >>> Maybe it could make sense to use overrides for the functions in struct hc_driver > >>> instead in some cases? There is support for that already. > >> > >> What overrides could be done for these changes? At first glance that > >> would seem to require a lot of duplicated code in whatever override > >> happens to be needed. > >> > >> thanks, > >> > >> greg k-h > > > > This patch series is all the changes for the offload hooks currently. > > > > I thought about this, but if I tried to override the functions in > > struct hc_driver, that'll need to > > copy many code to the override function, and it won't follow the > > latest change in the core > > xhci driver. > > > > > > - Howard > > Ok, I see. > > The point I'm trying to make is that there is no way for me to know if > these hooks are the right solution before I see any code using them. > > Is the offloading code ready and public somewhere? There is offload code published in the last few Samsung phone kernels, I want to get that ported to these hooks to see if that works properly. Give me a few days and I'll see if I can get it working, I had a half-finished port around here somewhere... thanks, greg k-h
