Re: [PATCH RFC] usb gadget: introduce usb_gadget_probe_driver

2010-07-30 Thread Michał Nazarewicz
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:49:14 +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: This is like usb_gadget_register_driver with the only difference that it gets the bind function as parameter instead of using driver->bind. This allows fixing section mismatches like WARNING: drivers/usb/gadget/g_printer.o(.

Re: [PATCH RFC] usb gadget: introduce usb_gadget_probe_driver

2010-07-30 Thread Michał Nazarewicz
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 17:26:02 +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 05:16:46PM +0200, Michał Nazarewicz wrote: On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:49:14 +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: This is like usb_gadget_register_driver with the only difference that it gets the bind function as

Re: [PATCH RFC] usb gadget: introduce usb_gadget_probe_driver

2010-08-02 Thread Michał Nazarewicz
On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:49:14 +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: by using usb_gadget_probe_driver with driver->bind = NULL. When all drivers are fixed to use the new function the bind member of struct usb_gadget_driver can go away. On second thought, would it be hard to just fix all the gadgets?

Re: [PATCH] usb gadget: don't save bind callback in struct usb_gadget_driver

2010-08-02 Thread Michał Nazarewicz
Some random thoughts, one bug and mostly just minor comments: @@ -1954,13 +1954,14 @@ static int setup_ep0(struct udc *dev) } /* Called by gadget driver to register itself */ -int usb_gadget_register_driver(struct usb_gadget_driver *driver) +int usb_gadget_probe_driver(struct usb_gadget_driver