On Fri, 22 Oct 2010, Wu, Hao wrote:
> >> diff --git a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> >> index 84c1897..2e29931 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c
> >
> >> @@ -1822,6 +1830,7 @@ int usb_new_device(struct usb_device *udev)
> >> * notifier chain (used by usbfs and possibly others).
> >> */
> >> err = device_add(&udev->dev);
> >> + otg_notify(udev, USB_DEVICE_ADD);
> >> if (err) {
> >> dev_err(&udev->dev, "can't device_add, error %d\n", err);
> >> goto fail;
> >
> >I just noticed this. Do you really want to send the notification
> >message even when device_add() fails? It would make more sense to add
> >this after the "if" statement.
> >
>
> Thanks for you comment.
>
> The main purpose for otg_notify() function is that do notification to otg transceiver driver who maintains the OTG state machine.
> For this case, otg_notify(udev, USB_DEVICE_ADD) notify USB device connect (b_conn) event to otg transceiver driver.
> Even it is failed to device_add(), but it also needs such device connect event to make sure OTG works in correct state according to spec.
But if device_add() fails then you will never call otg_notify(udev,
USB_DEVICE_REMOVE). Is that really what you want?
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
