From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/11] usb: phy: Add APIs for runtime power management Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 17:20:11 +0530 Message-ID: <516FDDF3.30507@ti.com> References: <1364824448-14732-1-git-send-email-gautam.vivek@samsung.com> <1364824448-14732-2-git-send-email-gautam.vivek@samsung.com> <20130402082342.GF30286@arwen.pp.htv.fi> <20130402121048.GA9488@arwen.pp.htv.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Vivek Gautam Cc: balbi@ti.com, Vivek Gautam , linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, stern@rowland.harvard.edu, sarah.a.sharp@linux.intel.com, rob.herring@calxeda.com, kgene.kim@samsung.com, dianders@chromium.org, t.figa@samsung.com, p.paneri@samsung.com List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 02 April 2013 06:10 PM, Vivek Gautam wrote: > Hi, > > > On Tue, Apr 2, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, Apr 02, 2013 at 04:04:01PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote: >>>> On Mon, Apr 01, 2013 at 07:24:00PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote: >>>>> Adding APIs to handle runtime power management on PHY >>>>> devices. PHY consumers may need to wake-up/suspend PHYs >>>>> when they work across autosuspend. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam >>>>> --- >>>>> include/linux/usb/phy.h | 141 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>> 1 files changed, 141 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/usb/phy.h b/include/linux/usb/phy.h >>>>> index 6b5978f..01bf9c1 100644 >>>>> --- a/include/linux/usb/phy.h >>>>> +++ b/include/linux/usb/phy.h >>>>> @@ -297,4 +297,145 @@ static inline const char *usb_phy_type_string(enum usb_phy_type type) >>>>> return "UNKNOWN PHY TYPE"; >>>>> } >>>>> } >>>>> + >>>>> +static inline void usb_phy_autopm_enable(struct usb_phy *x) >>>>> +{ >>>>> + if (!x || !x->dev) { >>>>> + dev_err(x->dev, "no PHY or attached device available\n"); >>>>> + return; >>>>> + } >>>> >>>> wrong indentation, also, I'm not sure we should allow calls with NULL >>>> pointers. Perhaps a WARN() so we get API offenders early enough ? >>> >>> True, bad coding style :-( >>> We should be handling dev_err with a NULL pointer. >>> Will just keep here: >>> if (WARN_ON(!x->dev)) >>> return .... ; >> >> right, but I guess: >> >> if (WARN(!x || !x->dev, "Invalid parameters\n")) >> return -EINVAL; >> >> would be better ?? btw, shouldn't it be IS_ERR(x)? Thanks Kishon