On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 08:23:34PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 08:35:47AM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 04:34:25PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > > UDC controllers still need to call gadget > > > driver's methods. For now, let's continue > > > holding a gadget driver pointer on musb's > > > structure until we finish the conversion > > > to the udc class. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx> > > > --- > > > drivers/usb/musb/musb_gadget.c | 1 + > > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_gadget.c b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_gadget.c > > > index 3a0c465..8b62654 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_gadget.c > > > +++ b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_gadget.c > > > @@ -1881,6 +1881,7 @@ static int musb_gadget_start(struct usb_gadget *g, > > > dev_dbg(musb->controller, "registering driver %s\n", driver->function); > > > > > > musb->softconnect = 0; > > > + musb->gadget_driver = driver; > > > > How can you "hold" a pointer safely without incrementing its reference > > count? > > done by udc-core. This is just not to break the driver completely while > we're still converting to the new API. But as this is patch 40/41, shouldn't that be done before this one in the series, otherwise things are broken at patch 39? > > And when is the "conversion" going to be finished? > > Next merge window, it's mentioned in the GIT PULL mail. Ah, ok, that's for 3.2.0, right? thanks, greg k-h -- 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
