On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 01:33:05PM +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Hi,
>
> this patch contains the following section:
>
> index 260b259b72bc..c3515bad5dbb 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/host/xhci.h
> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/xhci.h
> @@ -1850,6 +1850,7 @@ struct xhci_hcd {
> #define XHCI_ZERO_64B_REGS BIT_ULL(32)
> #define XHCI_DEFAULT_PM_RUNTIME_ALLOW BIT_ULL(33)
> #define XHCI_RESET_PLL_ON_DISCONNECT BIT_ULL(34)
> +#define XHCI_SNPS_BROKEN_SUSPEND BIT_ULL(35)
>
> unsigned int num_active_eps;
> unsigned int limit_active_eps;
> @@ -1879,6 +1880,8 @@ struct xhci_hcd {
> void *dbc;
> /* platform-specific data -- must come last */
> unsigned long priv[0] __aligned(sizeof(s64));
> + /* Broken Suspend flag for SNPS Suspend resume issue */
> + u8 broken_suspend;
> };
>
> /* Platform specific overrides to generic XHCI hc_driver ops */
>
> The placement of the broken_suspend flag seems to break every
> usage of the priv member of struct xhci_hcd.
> Are you sure that is a good idea?
Ugh, ick, no, that's totally wrong :(
How did this work? I guess no one tried this type of host controller on
a platform xhci driver?
Sandeep or oliver, , want to send a fixup patch?
And shouldn't that just be a bool or a bitflag?
thanks,
greg k-h
