Re: i.MX USB Re-Structure

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Dear Subodh Nijsure,

> On 05/10/2012 06:12 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > Dear Sascha Hauer,
> > 
> >> On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 02:05:24PM +0800, Peter Chen wrote:
> >>> Hi Sascha,
> >>> 
> >>> Recently, Alexander Shishkin has posted new chipidea patchset
> >>> (
> >>> to support USB driver who use chipidea core. In his structure,
> >>> all controller related files (like ehci-mxc.c, fsl-udc-core.c, etc)
> >>> will be drivers/usb/chipidea, and no related file will be host, gadget
> >>> and otg again.
> >>> 
> >>> So, it will be different with marek has posted i.mx28 USB driver,
> >>> and also different with your proposal in the past. But I think
> >>> you and marek may prefer Alexander's structure, and would like
> >>> use it for in future, correct?
> >> 
> >> I was not aware of this patchset. I only had a short look at it, but
> >> yes, it seems to be the way to go, for all SoCs supporting this
> >> hardware, be it i.MX, MXS or something else.
> > 
> > Correct, I can't but agree here.
> In followup message referenced above Felipe Balbi said he can't put
> above patch in v3.5 pull and has to be deferred till 3.6.
> So are we left with roll your own i.MX USB support for 3.5? Is Marek's
> work going to be part of 3.5 pull?

It won't, it's still RFC. Also, I'd like to flip my work on top of this ci13xxx 
rework. But for that, it'd be cool if it was possible to push it into v3.5, it'd 
help a lot. So can we possibly make a compromise in here ?

> -Subodh

Best regards,
Marek Vasut

linux-arm-kernel mailing list

[Linux ARM (vger)]     [Linux ARM MSM]     [Linux Omap]     [Linux Arm]     [Linux Tegra]     [Fedora ARM]     [eCos]     [Linux Fastboot]     [Gcc Help]     [Git]     [DCCP]     [IETF Announce]     [Security]     [PDAs]     [Linux]     [Linux MIPS]     [Yosemite Campsites]     [Photos]

Add to Google Follow linuxarm on Twitter