On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:47 PM, Felipe Balbi <ba...@ti.com> 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
>> <li...@arm.linux.org.uk> 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 majord...@vger.kernel.org
>> > 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 majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
