[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130725144118.GA5412@linutronix.de>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 16:41:18 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Bin Liu <binmlist@...il.com>
Cc: linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
balbi@...com, george.cherian@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/16] usb: musb: dsps: rename ti81xx_driver_data to
am33xx_driver_data
* Bin Liu | 2013-07-23 13:23:57 [-0500]:
>Hi Sebastian,
Hi Liu,
>On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <
>bigeasy@...utronix.de> wrote:
>
>> This patch renames the type struct from ti81xx_driver_data to
>> am33xx_driver_data since it is not used for ti81xx anymore. The EOI
>> member is also removed since the am33xx SoC does not have such register.
>> The interrupt is acknowledged by writting into the stat register.
>>
>I guess the EOI register is removed from the TRM because AM33xx does not
>use it, there is no need to write to it to acknowledge. It does not hurt to
>write to it though since the register still exists, it just does nothing, I
>guess.
Is it really there or was it never there and it has been added to TRM by
accident?
>But I am not sure if it is a good idea to remove eoi from the musb_dsps
>driver. If the intension is to merge the support for other SoC, such as
>AM35xx, AM18xx, then EOI handling might be still needed. I just don't know
>how those devices use EOI.
If one of the architectures gets added which need an EOI then the offset
can be 0 and the EOI will happen only if it is != 0.
>
>Regards,
>-Bin.
Sebastian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists