Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: musb: Call atomic_notifier_call_chain when status is changed
On Wednesday 18 September 2013 03:49:42 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:28:42PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 18:08:35 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 06:05:15PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:48:59 you wrote:
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
More power supply drivers depends on vbus events and
without it they not working. Power supply drivers
using usb_register_notifier, so to deliver events
it is needed to call atomic_notifier_call_chain.
So without atomic notifier power supply driver
isp1704 not retrieving vbus status and reporting
bogus values to userspace and also to board
platform data functions. Without proper data
charger drivers trying to charge battery also when
charger is disconnected or do not start charging
when wallcharger connects.
Atomic notifier in musb driver was used before v3.5
and was replaced with omap mailbox. This patch
adding atomic_notifier_call_chain call from
function omap_musb_set_mailbox.
Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com
---
drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c |3 +++
drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c |2 ++
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
b/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c index f44e8b5..5c40252
100644 --- a/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
@@ -305,6 +305,9 @@ static void
omap_musb_set_mailbox(struct omap2430_glue *glue)
default:
dev_dbg(dev, ID float\n);
}
+
+ atomic_notifier_call_chain(musb-xceiv-notifier,
+ musb-xceiv-last_event, NULL);
let's add a wrapper for this:
static inline int usb_phy_notify(struct usb phy *x,
unsigned val, void *v) {
return atomic_notifier_call_chain(x-notifier, val,
v);
}
Where to add this wrapper? To omap2430.c? or some
include file?
linux/usb/phy.h
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:49:17 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c index
8f78d2d..efe6155 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
@@ -705,6 +705,8 @@ static int
twl4030_usb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
if (device_create_file(pdev-dev,
dev_attr_vbus))
dev_warn(pdev-dev, could not create sysfs
file\n);
+ ATOMIC_INIT_NOTIFIER_HEAD(twl-phy.notifier);
BTW, this is a bugfix, send separately.
What to send separately?
This full patch 1/4 is bugfix. And I did not understand
what you want. Maybe it could be easier for you to
apply this small 3+2 lines patch how you need.
This hunk here (initializaing notifier head) is a separate
bug fix and needs its own patch.
So will you do that? Or it is needed to resend this one line
hunk again in new email again?
new patch, new email
Guys, WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID AND ARROGANT?
Sorry but, need to copy full isolated patch/hunk from one mail to
another is hassling. So what you want from me? Do all those non
sense working only because yesterday you had bad day? Or what?
Everything needed with described information was in first mail.
Also second hunk has full isolated git diff output, so it is for
you really big problem to copy it? Or you did not see that patch?
I really did not understand what you wanted from me.
BEGINNING OF PATCH
This is bugfix and sending this patch separately from all other patches.
This patch is visibly isolated from all others and could be readable also
by disabled people. For other handicapped people I suggest to increase
font size and other text settings in program which view this patch.
For visually impaired people I suggest to use some text-to-speech software.
This is small 2 lines patch, diff starting after next visible break.
This patch initializing notifier head in tw4030 usb code which is missing.
Initialization code is needed for using any atomic_notifier_* functions.
Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com
===
BEGINNING OF DIFF
===
diff --git a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
index 8f78d2d..efe6155 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
@@ -705,6 +705,8 @@ static int twl4030_usb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
if (device_create_file(pdev-dev,
Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: musb: Call atomic_notifier_call_chain when status is changed
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday 18 September 2013 03:49:42 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:28:42PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 18:08:35 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 06:05:15PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:48:59 you wrote:
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
More power supply drivers depends on vbus events and
without it they not working. Power supply drivers
using usb_register_notifier, so to deliver events
it is needed to call atomic_notifier_call_chain.
So without atomic notifier power supply driver
isp1704 not retrieving vbus status and reporting
bogus values to userspace and also to board
platform data functions. Without proper data
charger drivers trying to charge battery also when
charger is disconnected or do not start charging
when wallcharger connects.
Atomic notifier in musb driver was used before v3.5
and was replaced with omap mailbox. This patch
adding atomic_notifier_call_chain call from
function omap_musb_set_mailbox.
Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com
---
drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c |3 +++
drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c |2 ++
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
b/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c index f44e8b5..5c40252
100644 --- a/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
@@ -305,6 +305,9 @@ static void
omap_musb_set_mailbox(struct omap2430_glue *glue)
default:
dev_dbg(dev, ID float\n);
}
+
+ atomic_notifier_call_chain(musb-xceiv-notifier,
+ musb-xceiv-last_event, NULL);
let's add a wrapper for this:
static inline int usb_phy_notify(struct usb phy *x,
unsigned val, void *v) {
return atomic_notifier_call_chain(x-notifier, val,
v);
}
Where to add this wrapper? To omap2430.c? or some
include file?
linux/usb/phy.h
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:49:17 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c index
8f78d2d..efe6155 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
@@ -705,6 +705,8 @@ static int
twl4030_usb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
if (device_create_file(pdev-dev,
dev_attr_vbus))
dev_warn(pdev-dev, could not create sysfs
file\n);
+ ATOMIC_INIT_NOTIFIER_HEAD(twl-phy.notifier);
BTW, this is a bugfix, send separately.
What to send separately?
This full patch 1/4 is bugfix. And I did not understand
what you want. Maybe it could be easier for you to
apply this small 3+2 lines patch how you need.
This hunk here (initializaing notifier head) is a separate
bug fix and needs its own patch.
So will you do that? Or it is needed to resend this one line
hunk again in new email again?
new patch, new email
Guys, WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID AND ARROGANT?
Sorry but, need to copy full isolated patch/hunk from one mail to
another is hassling. So what you want from me? Do all those non
sense working only because yesterday you had bad day? Or what?
Everything needed with described information was in first mail.
Also second hunk has full isolated git diff output, so it is for
you really big problem to copy it? Or you did not see that patch?
I really did not understand what you wanted from me.
BEGINNING OF PATCH
This is bugfix and sending this patch separately from all other patches.
This patch is visibly isolated from all others and could be readable also
by disabled people. For other handicapped people I suggest to increase
font size and other text settings in program which view this patch.
For visually impaired people I suggest to use some text-to-speech software.
This is small 2 lines patch, diff starting after next visible break.
This patch initializing notifier head in tw4030 usb code which is missing.
Initialization code is needed for using any atomic_notifier_* functions.
Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com
===
BEGINNING OF DIFF
===
diff --git a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
index 8f78d2d..efe6155 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
@@ -705,6 +705,8 @@ static int twl4030_usb_probe(struct
Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: musb: Call atomic_notifier_call_chain when status is changed
Hi! So will you do that? Or it is needed to resend this one line hunk again in new email again? new patch, new email Guys, WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID AND ARROGANT? Sorry but, need to copy full isolated patch/hunk from one mail to another is hassling. So what you want from me? Do all those non sense working only because yesterday you had bad day? Or what? ... Hi Pali, There is no need to be rude. Felipe asked you to do the split since he believes that the notifier chain call for musb xceiv and the twl-phy notifier head init should be done in two separate patches. Actually, there is need to be rude, because Felipe fails to act as maintainer. Instead of fixing bugs in his code, he bounces bugfix patches, points people to random READMEs and wastes everyones time. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-omap in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: musb: Call atomic_notifier_call_chain when status is changed
Hi! So will you do that? Or it is needed to resend this one line hunk again in new email again? new patch, new email Guys, WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID AND ARROGANT? Sorry but, need to copy full isolated patch/hunk from one mail to another is hassling. So what you want from me? Do all those non sense working only because yesterday you had bad day? Or what? ... Actually, there is need to be rude, because Felipe fails to act as maintainer. Instead of fixing bugs in his code, he bounces bugfix patches, points people to random READMEs and wastes everyones time. I don't know what are you talking about (if that happened in another thread then I need more context). Felipe is not bouncing any bugfix Take a look here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/17/286 I clearly state that patch can not be tested as required for proper submission, but offer patch anyway. I get irrelevant boilerplate on patch format. but just asked to split the patch in two since the patch was solving two separate issues so is way better to have it in two separate patches for the reasons I explained before. So, as far as I can tell Felipe did exactly what I would expect from a maintainer. He took the time to review the patches sent to him and I'd expect maintainer to, well, maintain code. It means actually fixing bugs in his code, when he's pointed at them. gave feedback. If the sender doesn't want to take his feedback into account and prefer to send pretty insulting emails instead that is his choice but I would say that is this not the greatest approach to get your code merged (to say the least). Clearly not. But Pali found bug in code Felipe should maintain. Instead of thank you for bug report, I applied this one line of your code to fix it, Pali got new patch, new email for his efforts. That is how you train dogs, not how you should treat kernel contributors. Now, it is possible that Felipe just has problems with english, as he called me piece of wood in https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/17/476 , but he appears more arogant than usual over email. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-omap in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: musb: Call atomic_notifier_call_chain when status is changed
Hi! gave feedback. If the sender doesn't want to take his feedback into account and prefer to send pretty insulting emails instead that is his choice but I would say that is this not the greatest approach to get your code merged (to say the least). Clearly not. But Pali found bug in code Felipe should maintain. Instead of thank you for bug report, I applied this one line of your code to fix it, Pali got new patch, new email for his efforts. That is how you train dogs, not how you should treat kernel contributors. Now, it is possible that Felipe just has problems with english, as he called me piece of wood in https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/17/476 , but he appears more arogant than usual over email. Actually he called me piece of wood with garbage in it. I guess I have right to be offended. I'm baby in the next email. Hmm. Pavel -- (english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek (cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-omap in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: musb: Call atomic_notifier_call_chain when status is changed
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 4:22 PM, Pavel Machek pa...@ucw.cz wrote: Hi! So will you do that? Or it is needed to resend this one line hunk again in new email again? new patch, new email Guys, WHY ARE YOU SO STUPID AND ARROGANT? Sorry but, need to copy full isolated patch/hunk from one mail to another is hassling. So what you want from me? Do all those non sense working only because yesterday you had bad day? Or what? ... Actually, there is need to be rude, because Felipe fails to act as maintainer. Instead of fixing bugs in his code, he bounces bugfix patches, points people to random READMEs and wastes everyones time. I don't know what are you talking about (if that happened in another thread then I need more context). Felipe is not bouncing any bugfix Take a look here: https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/17/286 I clearly state that patch can not be tested as required for proper submission, but offer patch anyway. I get irrelevant boilerplate on patch format. Felipe didn't complain about you not being to be able to test the patch (most of the times compile tested if enough) what he said was: Seriously though, read that file, you're commit log has garbage in it which shouldn't go to git history. which is totally true, if you want to comment things that don't have to go to the backlog you can't comment between the --- after your s-o-b and before the first diff. That's were you should puts comments like Hi! or Here's suggested patch. I don't have the hardware, so it is completely untested. but just asked to split the patch in two since the patch was solving two separate issues so is way better to have it in two separate patches for the reasons I explained before. So, as far as I can tell Felipe did exactly what I would expect from a maintainer. He took the time to review the patches sent to him and I'd expect maintainer to, well, maintain code. It means actually fixing bugs in his code, when he's pointed at them. gave feedback. If the sender doesn't want to take his feedback into account and prefer to send pretty insulting emails instead that is his choice but I would say that is this not the greatest approach to get your code merged (to say the least). Clearly not. But Pali found bug in code Felipe should maintain. Instead of thank you for bug report, I applied this one line of your code to fix it, Pali got new patch, new email for his efforts. That is how you train dogs, not how you should treat kernel contributors. No, you misunderstood the role of the maintainers. Maintainers should be custodian of a part of the kernel but not responsible for every single line of code on their sub-systems. If a piece of code is buggy then the people using and that take care of that should be fixing and maintainers should review and suggest improvements to the patches. As long as a piece of code keep compiling then it is harmless even if is buggy and nobody cares about it. If it is so broken that it doesn't even compile then the maintainer can decide to just drop it since no one else seems to care about it. If someone finds a bug on a piece of code is because that people care about that functionality. Maintainers are really busy people and can jump and fix any random bug that someone finds on a piece of code just because it is the subsystem they maintainer neither they have to blindly merge any crappy patch just because they don't have time (or interest) in fixing a reported bug on a piece of code. Now, it is possible that Felipe just has problems with english, as he called me piece of wood in https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/17/476 , but he appears more arogant than usual over email. Clearly he meant your commit log has garbage instead of you're, that's a typo. Pavel But neither Felipe needs someone to defend him nor I have time to keep arguing with you. Have nice day! Javier -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-omap in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: musb: Call atomic_notifier_call_chain when status is changed
Hi, On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 04:35:37PM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote: Hi! gave feedback. If the sender doesn't want to take his feedback into account and prefer to send pretty insulting emails instead that is his choice but I would say that is this not the greatest approach to get your code merged (to say the least). Clearly not. But Pali found bug in code Felipe should maintain. Instead of thank you for bug report, I applied this one line of your code to fix it, Pali got new patch, new email for his efforts. That is how you train dogs, not how you should treat kernel contributors. Now, it is possible that Felipe just has problems with english, as he called me piece of wood in https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/17/476 , but he appears more arogant than usual over email. Actually he called me piece of wood with garbage in it. I guess I have right to be offended. I'm baby in the next email. Hmm. what a baby. Grow up dude, just grow up. I said your commit log has garbage which shouldn't be there (there was a typo you're instead of your). -- balbi signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: musb: Call atomic_notifier_call_chain when status is changed
On Wednesday 18 September 2013 15:57:13 Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: to split the patch in two since the patch was solving two separate issues My patch does not solving *two* issues. It is *one* regression and both parts of patch are needed for fixing it. Read commit message again. It does not make sense to split patch fixing kernel regression into more one line patches - or please clarify why. -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: musb: Call atomic_notifier_call_chain when status is changed
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 05:56:12PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: On Wednesday 18 September 2013 15:57:13 Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: to split the patch in two since the patch was solving two separate issues My patch does not solving *two* issues. It is *one* regression and both parts of patch are needed for fixing it. Read commit message again. It does not make sense to split patch fixing kernel regression into more one line patches - or please clarify why. issue 1) twl4030-usb.c doesn't initialize atomic notifier head issue 2) musb doesn't call notifier chain do you need a drawing ? -- balbi signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: musb: Call atomic_notifier_call_chain when status is changed
On Wednesday 18 September 2013 18:36:49 Felipe Balbi wrote: On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 05:56:12PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: On Wednesday 18 September 2013 15:57:13 Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: to split the patch in two since the patch was solving two separate issues My patch does not solving *two* issues. It is *one* regression and both parts of patch are needed for fixing it. Read commit message again. It does not make sense to split patch fixing kernel regression into more one line patches - or please clarify why. issue 1) twl4030-usb.c doesn't initialize atomic notifier head issue 2) musb doesn't call notifier chain do you need a drawing ? Regression 1) power supply drivers not working since v3.5 Look at firsts emails. Do you really have problem to do what *you* need with 1 line patch which I sent? Or what what you want? -- Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: musb: Call atomic_notifier_call_chain when status is changed
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 06:43:49PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: On Wednesday 18 September 2013 18:36:49 Felipe Balbi wrote: On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 05:56:12PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: On Wednesday 18 September 2013 15:57:13 Javier Martinez Canillas wrote: to split the patch in two since the patch was solving two separate issues My patch does not solving *two* issues. It is *one* regression and both parts of patch are needed for fixing it. Read commit message again. It does not make sense to split patch fixing kernel regression into more one line patches - or please clarify why. issue 1) twl4030-usb.c doesn't initialize atomic notifier head issue 2) musb doesn't call notifier chain do you need a drawing ? Regression 1) power supply drivers not working since v3.5 Look at firsts emails. Do you really have problem to do what *you* need with 1 line patch which I sent? Or what what you want? if you had already resent patches the way I requested, they'd already be applied. Instead you chose to troll the people who are trying to helping out. You have two issues being fixed in the same patch and that's not acceptable. -- balbi signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: musb: Call atomic_notifier_call_chain when status is changed
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:48:59 you wrote:
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
More power supply drivers depends on vbus events and without
it they not working. Power supply drivers using
usb_register_notifier, so to deliver events it is needed to
call atomic_notifier_call_chain.
So without atomic notifier power supply driver isp1704 not
retrieving vbus status and reporting bogus values to
userspace and also to board platform data functions.
Without proper data charger drivers trying to charge
battery also when charger is disconnected or do not start
charging when wallcharger connects.
Atomic notifier in musb driver was used before v3.5 and was
replaced with omap mailbox. This patch adding
atomic_notifier_call_chain call from function
omap_musb_set_mailbox.
Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com
---
drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c |3 +++
drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c |2 ++
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
b/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c index f44e8b5..5c40252 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
@@ -305,6 +305,9 @@ static void omap_musb_set_mailbox(struct
omap2430_glue *glue)
default:
dev_dbg(dev, ID float\n);
}
+
+ atomic_notifier_call_chain(musb-xceiv-notifier,
+ musb-xceiv-last_event, NULL);
let's add a wrapper for this:
static inline int usb_phy_notify(struct usb phy *x, unsigned
val, void *v) {
return atomic_notifier_call_chain(x-notifier, val, v);
}
Where to add this wrapper? To omap2430.c? or some include file?
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:49:17 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c index 8f78d2d..efe6155
100644
--- a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
@@ -705,6 +705,8 @@ static int twl4030_usb_probe(struct
platform_device *pdev)
if (device_create_file(pdev-dev, dev_attr_vbus))
dev_warn(pdev-dev, could not create sysfs file\n);
+ ATOMIC_INIT_NOTIFIER_HEAD(twl-phy.notifier);
BTW, this is a bugfix, send separately.
What to send separately?
This full patch 1/4 is bugfix. And I did not understand what you
want. Maybe it could be easier for you to apply this small 3+2
lines patch how you need.
--
Pali Rohár
pali.ro...@gmail.com
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: musb: Call atomic_notifier_call_chain when status is changed
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: diff --git a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c index 8f78d2d..efe6155 100644 --- a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c +++ b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c @@ -705,6 +705,8 @@ static int twl4030_usb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) if (device_create_file(pdev-dev, dev_attr_vbus)) dev_warn(pdev-dev, could not create sysfs file\n); + ATOMIC_INIT_NOTIFIER_HEAD(twl-phy.notifier); BTW, this is a bugfix, send separately. -- balbi signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: musb: Call atomic_notifier_call_chain when status is changed
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 06:05:15PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:48:59 you wrote:
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
More power supply drivers depends on vbus events and without
it they not working. Power supply drivers using
usb_register_notifier, so to deliver events it is needed to
call atomic_notifier_call_chain.
So without atomic notifier power supply driver isp1704 not
retrieving vbus status and reporting bogus values to
userspace and also to board platform data functions.
Without proper data charger drivers trying to charge
battery also when charger is disconnected or do not start
charging when wallcharger connects.
Atomic notifier in musb driver was used before v3.5 and was
replaced with omap mailbox. This patch adding
atomic_notifier_call_chain call from function
omap_musb_set_mailbox.
Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com
---
drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c |3 +++
drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c |2 ++
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
b/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c index f44e8b5..5c40252 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
@@ -305,6 +305,9 @@ static void omap_musb_set_mailbox(struct
omap2430_glue *glue)
default:
dev_dbg(dev, ID float\n);
}
+
+ atomic_notifier_call_chain(musb-xceiv-notifier,
+ musb-xceiv-last_event, NULL);
let's add a wrapper for this:
static inline int usb_phy_notify(struct usb phy *x, unsigned
val, void *v) {
return atomic_notifier_call_chain(x-notifier, val, v);
}
Where to add this wrapper? To omap2430.c? or some include file?
linux/usb/phy.h
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:49:17 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c index 8f78d2d..efe6155
100644
--- a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
@@ -705,6 +705,8 @@ static int twl4030_usb_probe(struct
platform_device *pdev)
if (device_create_file(pdev-dev, dev_attr_vbus))
dev_warn(pdev-dev, could not create sysfs file\n);
+ ATOMIC_INIT_NOTIFIER_HEAD(twl-phy.notifier);
BTW, this is a bugfix, send separately.
What to send separately?
This full patch 1/4 is bugfix. And I did not understand what you
want. Maybe it could be easier for you to apply this small 3+2
lines patch how you need.
This hunk here (initializaing notifier head) is a separate bug fix and
needs its own patch.
--
balbi
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: musb: Call atomic_notifier_call_chain when status is changed
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
More power supply drivers depends on vbus events and without it they not
working. Power supply drivers using usb_register_notifier, so to deliver
events it is needed to call atomic_notifier_call_chain.
So without atomic notifier power supply driver isp1704 not retrieving
vbus status and reporting bogus values to userspace and also to board
platform data functions. Without proper data charger drivers trying to
charge battery also when charger is disconnected or do not start charging
when wallcharger connects.
Atomic notifier in musb driver was used before v3.5 and was replaced with
omap mailbox. This patch adding atomic_notifier_call_chain call from
function omap_musb_set_mailbox.
Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com
---
drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c |3 +++
drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c |2 ++
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c b/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
index f44e8b5..5c40252 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
@@ -305,6 +305,9 @@ static void omap_musb_set_mailbox(struct omap2430_glue
*glue)
default:
dev_dbg(dev, ID float\n);
}
+
+ atomic_notifier_call_chain(musb-xceiv-notifier,
+ musb-xceiv-last_event, NULL);
let's add a wrapper for this:
static inline int usb_phy_notify(struct usb phy *x, unsigned val, void *v)
{
return atomic_notifier_call_chain(x-notifier, val, v);
}
--
balbi
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: musb: Call atomic_notifier_call_chain when status is changed
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 18:08:35 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 06:05:15PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:48:59 you wrote:
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
More power supply drivers depends on vbus events and
without it they not working. Power supply drivers using
usb_register_notifier, so to deliver events it is
needed to call atomic_notifier_call_chain.
So without atomic notifier power supply driver isp1704
not retrieving vbus status and reporting bogus values
to userspace and also to board platform data functions.
Without proper data charger drivers trying to charge
battery also when charger is disconnected or do not
start charging when wallcharger connects.
Atomic notifier in musb driver was used before v3.5 and
was replaced with omap mailbox. This patch adding
atomic_notifier_call_chain call from function
omap_musb_set_mailbox.
Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com
---
drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c |3 +++
drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c |2 ++
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
b/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c index f44e8b5..5c40252
100644 --- a/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
@@ -305,6 +305,9 @@ static void
omap_musb_set_mailbox(struct omap2430_glue *glue)
default:
dev_dbg(dev, ID float\n);
}
+
+ atomic_notifier_call_chain(musb-xceiv-notifier,
+ musb-xceiv-last_event, NULL);
let's add a wrapper for this:
static inline int usb_phy_notify(struct usb phy *x,
unsigned val, void *v) {
return atomic_notifier_call_chain(x-notifier, val, v);
}
Where to add this wrapper? To omap2430.c? or some include
file?
linux/usb/phy.h
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:49:17 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c index
8f78d2d..efe6155 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
@@ -705,6 +705,8 @@ static int twl4030_usb_probe(struct
platform_device *pdev)
if (device_create_file(pdev-dev, dev_attr_vbus))
dev_warn(pdev-dev, could not create sysfs
file\n);
+ ATOMIC_INIT_NOTIFIER_HEAD(twl-phy.notifier);
BTW, this is a bugfix, send separately.
What to send separately?
This full patch 1/4 is bugfix. And I did not understand what
you want. Maybe it could be easier for you to apply this
small 3+2 lines patch how you need.
This hunk here (initializaing notifier head) is a separate bug
fix and needs its own patch.
So will you do that? Or it is needed to resend this one line hunk
again in new email again?
--
Pali Rohár
pali.ro...@gmail.com
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [PATCH 1/4] usb: musb: Call atomic_notifier_call_chain when status is changed
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 09:28:42PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 18:08:35 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Tue, Sep 17, 2013 at 06:05:15PM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:48:59 you wrote:
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
More power supply drivers depends on vbus events and
without it they not working. Power supply drivers using
usb_register_notifier, so to deliver events it is
needed to call atomic_notifier_call_chain.
So without atomic notifier power supply driver isp1704
not retrieving vbus status and reporting bogus values
to userspace and also to board platform data functions.
Without proper data charger drivers trying to charge
battery also when charger is disconnected or do not
start charging when wallcharger connects.
Atomic notifier in musb driver was used before v3.5 and
was replaced with omap mailbox. This patch adding
atomic_notifier_call_chain call from function
omap_musb_set_mailbox.
Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár pali.ro...@gmail.com
---
drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c |3 +++
drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c |2 ++
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
b/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c index f44e8b5..5c40252
100644 --- a/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
@@ -305,6 +305,9 @@ static void
omap_musb_set_mailbox(struct omap2430_glue *glue)
default:
dev_dbg(dev, ID float\n);
}
+
+ atomic_notifier_call_chain(musb-xceiv-notifier,
+ musb-xceiv-last_event, NULL);
let's add a wrapper for this:
static inline int usb_phy_notify(struct usb phy *x,
unsigned val, void *v) {
return atomic_notifier_call_chain(x-notifier, val, v);
}
Where to add this wrapper? To omap2430.c? or some include
file?
linux/usb/phy.h
On Tuesday 17 September 2013 17:49:17 Felipe Balbi wrote:
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 10:50:36AM +0200, Pali Rohár wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c index
8f78d2d..efe6155 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/phy/phy-twl4030-usb.c
@@ -705,6 +705,8 @@ static int twl4030_usb_probe(struct
platform_device *pdev)
if (device_create_file(pdev-dev, dev_attr_vbus))
dev_warn(pdev-dev, could not create sysfs
file\n);
+ ATOMIC_INIT_NOTIFIER_HEAD(twl-phy.notifier);
BTW, this is a bugfix, send separately.
What to send separately?
This full patch 1/4 is bugfix. And I did not understand what
you want. Maybe it could be easier for you to apply this
small 3+2 lines patch how you need.
This hunk here (initializaing notifier head) is a separate bug
fix and needs its own patch.
So will you do that? Or it is needed to resend this one line hunk
again in new email again?
new patch, new email
--
balbi
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
