From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Greg KH Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the usb tree with the usb.current tree Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 10:41:08 +0200 Message-ID: <20180423084108.GA19889@kroah.com> References: <20180423130444.0672fb80@canb.auug.org.au> <20180423083011.GP9198@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180423083011.GP9198@localhost> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Johan Hovold Cc: Stephen Rothwell , Linux-Next Mailing List , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Martin Blumenstingl List-Id: linux-next.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 10:30:11AM +0200, Johan Hovold wrote: > On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 01:04:44PM +1000, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > Hi Greg, > > > > Today's linux-next merge of the usb tree got a conflict in: > > > > drivers/usb/core/hcd.c > > > > between commit: > > > > 63cb03f5c11e ("usb: core: split usb_phy_roothub_{init,alloc}") > > > > from the usb.current tree and commit: > > > > bc40f5341741 ("USB: core: hcd: drop support for legacy phys") > > > > from the usb tree. > > > > I fixed it up (see below - though I am not sure what happens to the > > phy_roothub allocation when usb_phy_roothub_init fails) and can carry > > the fix as necessary. > > The resolution looks correct to me. The allocations done by > usb_phy_roothub_alloc() are device managed and would be freed on probe > failures (or unbind) so not explicit dealloc is needed. It might be a > good idea to indicate that in the function name however (i.e. to add a > devm_ prefix). I'll take this same resolution when the branches get merged, thanks. And yes, being more explicit would be a good idea for the function name... thanks, greg k-h