[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y8k/Y4O/99pnKI2h@kroah.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2023 14:02:27 +0100
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Elson Roy Serrao <quic_eserrao@...cinc.com>
Cc: Thinh.Nguyen@...opsys.com, balbi@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
quic_wcheng@...cinc.com, quic_jackp@...cinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/5] usb: gadget: Add remote wakeup capable flag
On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 01:55:03PM -0800, Elson Roy Serrao wrote:
> Add a flag to indicate whether the gadget is capable
> of sending remote wakeup to the host.
>
> Signed-off-by: Elson Roy Serrao <quic_eserrao@...cinc.com>
> ---
> drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c | 3 +++
> include/linux/usb/gadget.h | 2 ++
> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c b/drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c
> index 403563c..b83963a 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/composite.c
> @@ -965,6 +965,9 @@ static int set_config(struct usb_composite_dev *cdev,
> else
> usb_gadget_clear_selfpowered(gadget);
>
> + if (USB_CONFIG_ATT_WAKEUP & c->bmAttributes)
> + gadget->rw_capable = 1;
> +
> usb_gadget_vbus_draw(gadget, power);
> if (result >= 0 && cdev->delayed_status)
> result = USB_GADGET_DELAYED_STATUS;
> diff --git a/include/linux/usb/gadget.h b/include/linux/usb/gadget.h
> index dc3092c..15785f8 100644
> --- a/include/linux/usb/gadget.h
> +++ b/include/linux/usb/gadget.h
> @@ -385,6 +385,7 @@ struct usb_gadget_ops {
> * indicates that it supports LPM as per the LPM ECN & errata.
> * @irq: the interrupt number for device controller.
> * @id_number: a unique ID number for ensuring that gadget names are distinct
> + * @rw_capable: True if the gadget is capable of sending remote wakeup.
> *
> * Gadgets have a mostly-portable "gadget driver" implementing device
> * functions, handling all usb configurations and interfaces. Gadget
> @@ -446,6 +447,7 @@ struct usb_gadget {
> unsigned lpm_capable:1;
> int irq;
> int id_number;
> + unsigned rw_capable:1;
Why not put this by the other bitfields in this structure?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists