On Tue, 9 Oct 2012, Chen Peter-B29397 wrote:
> > > @@ -4187,6 +4190,10 @@ static void hub_port_connect_change(struct
> > usb_hub *hub, int port1,
> > > }
> > > }
> > >
> > > + if (hcd->phy && !hdev->parent &&
> > > + !(portstatus & USB_PORT_STAT_CONNECTION))
> > > + usb_phy_notify_disconnect(hcd->phy, udev->speed);
> >
> > What happens if udev is NULL (see the test in the next statement)?
> >
>
> I will add the condition of (udev), the thing I want to do is:
You shouldn't add a new condition. Instead you should move your code
under the existing "if" statement.
> when the device is disconnected, the pcd interrupt will occur, and
> the code will be there, I need to tell the phy driver, the disconnection
> occurs, and the speed of the disconnected usb device.
>
> > > +
> > > /* Disconnect any existing devices under this port */
> > > if (udev)
> > > usb_disconnect(&hub->ports[port1 - 1]->child);
> > > @@ -4212,13 +4219,6 @@ static void hub_port_connect_change(struct
> > usb_hub *hub, int port1,
> > > }
> > > }
> > >
> > > - if (hcd->phy && !hdev->parent) {
> > > - if (portstatus & USB_PORT_STAT_CONNECTION)
> > > - usb_phy_notify_connect(hcd->phy, port1);
> > > - else
> > > - usb_phy_notify_disconnect(hcd->phy, port1);
> >
> > Is the second argument supposed to be a port number, like here, or a
> > speed value, like above? Clearly something is wrong, either in the old
> > code or in the new code.
> >
> The first patch at this patchset changes the API of usb_phy_notify_disconnect:
That means the first patch breaks the code. People running "git
bisect" might happen to hit a commit in between the two patches, and
their kernels won't compile. That's not acceptable.
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
