On 30 June 2015 at 08:51, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > Hi Hans, > > On 30 June 2015 at 06:29, Hans de Goede <hdego...@redhat.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> >> On 29-06-15 05:44, Simon Glass wrote: >>> >>> Hi Hans. >>> >>> On 17 June 2015 at 13:33, Hans de Goede <hdego...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Drop the unneeded portnr function argument, the portnr is part of the >>>> usb_device struct which is passed via the dev argument. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdego...@redhat.com> >>>> --- >>>> common/usb.c | 10 +++++----- >>>> drivers/usb/host/usb-uclass.c | 2 +- >>>> include/usb.h | 6 +++--- >>>> 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) >>> >>> >>> This was needed in the case where a fake usb_device was passed in. Has >>> your previous refactoring changed that? >> >> >> The portnr is still passed but it is padded via the usb_device struct's >> portnr member. When doing a CONFIG_DM_USB=y build the only call site of >> usb_setup_device() is usb_scan_device() from drivers/usb/host/usb-uclass.c >> which does: >> >> udev->portnr = port; >> debug("Calling usb_setup_device(), portnr=%d\n", udev->portnr); >> parent_udev = device_get_uclass_id(parent) == UCLASS_USB_HUB ? >> dev_get_parentdata(parent) : NULL; >> ret = usb_setup_device(udev, priv->desc_before_addr, parent_udev); >> >> So portnr is always set in the usb_device strict, and that is what gets >> used after this patch. > > OK thanks for explaining that. > > Acked-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>
Applied to u-boot-dm/next, thanks! _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot