[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5534F296.8000104@linux.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2015 15:35:34 +0300
From: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com>
To: Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com>, mathias.nyman@...el.com,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
CC: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] usb: xhci: plat: Create both HCDs before adding them
Hi
On 02.04.2015 15:23, Roger Quadros wrote:
> As xhci_hcd is now allocated by usb_create_hcd(), we don't
> need to add the primary HCD before creating the shared HCD.
>
> Creating the shared HCD before adding the primary HCD is particularly
> useful for the OTG use case so that we know at the OTG core if
> the HCD is in single configuration or dual (primary + shared)
> configuration.
>
This doesn't apply as
commit 7b8ef22ea547b80475ac7feab06fb15e0fc143d8
usb: xhci: plat: Add USB phy support
changed xhci-plat.c since.
I rebased it, and the changed version is sitting in the for-usb-next branch in:
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mnyman/xhci.git
But it appeared to me that usb_add_hcd() and usb_remove_hcd() will also
call phy init and remove functions. As the order how hcds are created and added
would change I'd need some more eyes on this to see if it will cause regression.
Or maybe in the best case we could get rid of the "Add USB phy support" patch as
we will call xhci_add_hcd() for the first hcd much later, and it could maybe init
the phy for us?
I don't have a board that enumerates xhci using xhci-plat.c myself.
-Mathias
--
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