[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160428141611.GK19428@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 15:16:12 +0100
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
To: Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>
Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
David Fisher <david.fisher1@...opsys.com>,
"Thang Q. Nguyen" <tqnguyen@....com>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: dwc3: host: inherit dma configuration from parent
dev
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 09:37:08AM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> writes:
> > pointer and pass that in platform_data. This is really easy, it's
>
> Sorry but passing a struct device pointer in platform_data is
> ridiculous. Not to mention that, as I said before, we can't assume which
> device to pass to xhci_plat in the first place. It might be dwc->dev and
> it might be dwc->dev->parent.
+1. Passing an unref-counted struct device through platform data is
totally mad, Arnd you're off your rocker if you think that's a good
idea. What's more is that there's no way to properly refcount the
thing.
--
RMK's Patch system: http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 9.6Mbps down 400kbps up
according to speedtest.net.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists