Re: [PATCH 2/2] usb: fix renesas_usbhs to not schedule in atomiccontext

[Felipe Balbi]

Hi,

On Thu, Feb 09, 2012 at 11:17:51PM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote:
> @@ -997,7 +991,7 @@ static bool usbhsf_dma_filter(struct dma_chan *chan, void *param)
>  	 *
>  	 * usbhs doesn't recognize id = 0 as valid DMA
>  	 */
> -	if (0 == slave->slave_id)
> +	if (0 == slave->simple_slave.slave_id)
>  		return false;
>  
>  	chan->private = slave;
> @@ -1176,8 +1170,8 @@ int usbhs_fifo_probe(struct usbhs_priv *priv)
>  	fifo->port	= D0FIFO;
>  	fifo->sel	= D0FIFOSEL;
>  	fifo->ctr	= D0FIFOCTR;
> -	fifo->tx_slave.slave_id	= usbhs_get_dparam(priv, d0_tx_id);
> -	fifo->rx_slave.slave_id	= usbhs_get_dparam(priv, d0_rx_id);
> +	fifo->tx_slave.simple_slave.slave_id	= usbhs_get_dparam(priv, d0_tx_id);
> +	fifo->rx_slave.simple_slave.slave_id	= usbhs_get_dparam(priv, d0_rx_id);

what are these "simple_slave" changes ? They have nothing to do with
$SUBJECT ? In fact, breaks my gadget branch.

How many times does a maintainer have to ask for contributors to keep
changes atomic ? One patch == One single, self-contained, change.

-- 
balbi

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature