Hi Heikki,
On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 12:27:10PM +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> Hi David,
>
>
>
> > > +void intel_usb_mux_unregister(struct intel_usb_mux *mux)
> > > +{
> >
> > There are still 2 pending comments for this unregister function:
> >
> > 1) How about a protection against unbalanced
Hi David,
> > +void intel_usb_mux_unregister(struct intel_usb_mux *mux)
> > +{
>
> There are still 2 pending comments for this unregister function:
>
> 1) How about a protection against unbalanced unregistering? In case an
> user mistakenly unregisters twice or unregisters without a previous
>
Hi,
David Cohen writes:
> Hi Felipe,
>
> On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:34:34PM -0600, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(intel_usb_mux_register);
>> > +
>> > +void intel_usb_mux_unregister(struct intel_usb_mux *mux)
>> > +{
>> > + extcon_unregister_notifier(&mux->edev, EXTCON
Hi Felipe,
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 02:34:34PM -0600, Felipe Balbi wrote:
[snip]
> > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(intel_usb_mux_register);
> > +
> > +void intel_usb_mux_unregister(struct intel_usb_mux *mux)
> > +{
> > + extcon_unregister_notifier(&mux->edev, EXTCON_USB_HOST, &mux->nb);
> > + extcon_dev
Hi,
Heikki Krogerus writes:
> Several Intel PCHs and SOCs have an internal mux that is
> used to share one USB port between USB Device Controller and
> xHCI. The mux is normally handled by System FW/BIOS, but not
> always. For those platforms where the FW does not take care
> of the mux, this dr
Hi Heikki,
Follow my comments below.
On Tue, Dec 01, 2015 at 03:32:37PM +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote:
> Several Intel PCHs and SOCs have an internal mux that is
> used to share one USB port between USB Device Controller and
> xHCI. The mux is normally handled by System FW/BIOS, but not
> always.
6 matches
Mail list logo