From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1752821AbdDNIaL (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 14 Apr 2017 04:30:11 -0400
Received: from mail-lf0-f66.google.com ([209.85.215.66]:34473 "EHLO
        mail-lf0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751530AbdDNIaI (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 14 Apr 2017 04:30:08 -0400
Subject: Re: USB Type-C Port Manager API concern
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
References: <20170221142405.76299-3-heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
 <ae5d8f3a-859b-c3fa-1427-c25920a82abe@gmail.com>
 <4b4bbffc-db02-3b54-04bc-e7de79b2d9ed@roeck-us.net>
 <07618170-d561-e7fe-08e0-91316c53d832@gmail.com>
 <20170303125940.GA6999@kuha.fi.intel.com>
 <6ddb2eac-03d5-127e-df1e-ad189968e6b2@gmail.com>
 <20170306131442.GC6999@kuha.fi.intel.com>
 <696552a7-c36a-1d73-9517-543907e9da39@gmail.com>
 <9b32fabf-3ff5-112f-4249-a7024f808b20@roeck-us.net>
 <4fe455d8-30d9-0c21-46aa-6d273cd24d50@gmail.com>
 <20170409151614.GA23984@roeck-us.net>
 <949bc063-7002-c12c-ba56-8b46f9ea178b@gmail.com>
 <d3b5da42-d1f6-48fb-e379-7267c2ea7162@roeck-us.net>
Cc: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@linux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
From: Mats Karrman <mats.dev.list@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0a00a8a0-7955-559e-817e-72781908dd72@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2017 10:30:16 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <d3b5da42-d1f6-48fb-e379-7267c2ea7162@roeck-us.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 04/14/2017 04:57 AM, Guenter Roeck wrote:

> ... Overall I think there is an assumption in any API that any 
> callback functions provided in a registration call can immediately be 
> called. Otherwise any API would be in trouble. Can you modify your 
> code to not require the port pointer in its callback functions ?

Yes, I have deferred my calls until after the registration function has 
returned which seems only logical. Thanks, Mats