[PATCH 02/13] USB: phy: nop: Defer probe if device needs VCC/RESET
Marc Kleine-Budde
mkl at pengutronix.de
Tue Mar 12 02:58:15 EST 2013
On 02/05/2013 10:43 AM, Roger Quadros wrote:
> On 02/05/2013 11:09 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 10:44:05AM +0200, Roger Quadros wrote:
>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/usb/nop-usb-xceiv.h b/include/linux/usb/nop-usb-xceiv.h
>>>>> index 3265b61..148d351 100644
>>>>> --- a/include/linux/usb/nop-usb-xceiv.h
>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/usb/nop-usb-xceiv.h
>>>>> @@ -6,6 +6,10 @@
>>>>> struct nop_usb_xceiv_platform_data {
>>>>> enum usb_phy_type type;
>>>>> unsigned long clk_rate;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + /* if set fails with -EPROBE_DEFER if can't get regulator */
>>>>> + unsigned int needs_vcc:1;
>>>>> + unsigned int needs_reset:1;
>>>>
>>>> how about u8 here?
>>>
>>> Not sure. Bitfields are usually defined as unsigned int.
>>
>> IIRC the benefit is that compiler can try to optimize those flags. I
>> mean, if you have 32 1-bit flags, compiler will combine those in a
>> single u32. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
>>
>
> Yes you are right. Kishon was asking me to use u8 instead of unsigned int, which
> I don't think is necessary. AFAIK, it is a norm to use unsigned int when defining
> a bitfield. Compilers are known to behave funny with bitfields. I don't mind
> using bool for each.
In the current version (rogerq/v3.8-usbhost17-dt) of this patch you've
put both needs_* into the private data struct and the pdata, but it's
only used inside the probe function.
regards,
Marc
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Marc Kleine-Budde |
Industrial Linux Solutions | Phone: +49-231-2826-924 |
Vertretung West/Dortmund | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | http://www.pengutronix.de |
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 263 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/devicetree-discuss/attachments/20130311/4c8f073b/attachment-0001.sig>
More information about the devicetree-discuss
mailing list