On Wed, 2 Oct 2013, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Wednesday, October 02, 2013 10:38:58 AM Alan Stern wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Oct 2013, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> >
> > > Maybe it would make sense to cleanup ohci_suspend() first (before adding
> > > new ohci_suspend() users) and remove unused do_wakeup parameter?
> >
> > Not possible. The do_wakeup parameter is part of a function prototype
> > shared by other callback routines (such as ehci_suspend()) that _do_
> > use the parameter.
>
> If you mean ohci-pci.c usage (which is currently the only usage of
> ohci_suspend() looking at the latest -next kernel) than it is enough
> to add a simple wrapper for it in ohci-pci.c:
>
> ...
> static int ohci_pci_suspend(struct usb_hcd *hcd, bool do_wakeup)
> {
> ohci_suspend(hcd);
> }
> ...
> ohci_pci_hc_driver.pci_suspend = ohci_pci_suspend;
> ...
Ah, now I see your point. Yes, it's true; that parameter could be
eliminated.
Manjunath, would you like to update your patch series to get rid of the
do_wakeup argument to ohci_suspend()?
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
