On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:47 PM, Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 10:51:32AM +0800, Chao Xie wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 11:51 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux >> <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > On Mon, Jan 21, 2013 at 05:07:36AM -0500, Chao Xie wrote: >> >> + mv_phy->extern_chip.head = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, >> >> + sizeof(*mv_phy->extern_chip.head), >> >> + GFP_KERNEL); >> >> + if (mv_phy->extern_chip.head == NULL) >> >> + return -ENOMEM; >> >> + ATOMIC_INIT_NOTIFIER_HEAD(mv_phy->extern_chip.head); >> > >> > Why do you need to allocate an atomic notifier list head as an entirely >> > separate data structure? >> > -- >> > 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 >> >> Th reason is that the original code seperate the extern_chip and phy >> support. So it depends >> on the ->head to detect whether extern_chip is initialized or not. >> Now it is combined with phy, the ->phy pointer can do the job. > > does that need to be dynamically allocated ? > > -- > balbi hi It does not need to be dynamically allocated. I will modify it, and send out V5 today. Thanks for Russell's review. -- 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
