All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: w.sang@pengutronix.de (Wolfram Sang)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] USB: Support for LPC32xx SoC
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2012 04:51:28 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120225035128.GA4455@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201202241503.27406.arnd@arndb.de>

> I would recomment telling this from the device itself rather than from the
> platform.

Basically yes...

> Unfortunately, the way that ohci handles the abstraction between the
> various implementations is backwards, it would be much easier if the
> main driver was following that model to start with.

... exactly for that reason I didn't suggest it. Looking at other ohci-sources
(e.g. ohci-omap.c), machine_is_* seems to be the consistent use-case.

Thanks,

   Wolfram

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Wolfram Sang                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20120225/4e25fede/attachment.sig>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Wolfram Sang <w.sang@pengutronix.de>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Roland Stigge <stigge@antcom.de>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kevin.wells@nxp.com, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] USB: Support for LPC32xx SoC
Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2012 04:51:28 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120225035128.GA4455@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201202241503.27406.arnd@arndb.de>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 649 bytes --]

> I would recomment telling this from the device itself rather than from the
> platform.

Basically yes...

> Unfortunately, the way that ohci handles the abstraction between the
> various implementations is backwards, it would be much easier if the
> main driver was following that model to start with.

... exactly for that reason I didn't suggest it. Looking at other ohci-sources
(e.g. ohci-omap.c), machine_is_* seems to be the consistent use-case.

Thanks,

   Wolfram

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Wolfram Sang                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2012-02-25  3:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-02-23 20:57 [PATCH v2] USB: Support for LPC32xx SoC Roland Stigge
2012-02-23 20:57 ` Roland Stigge
2012-02-23 21:05 ` Roland Stigge
2012-02-23 21:05   ` Roland Stigge
2012-02-24  6:35   ` Wolfram Sang
2012-02-24  6:35     ` Wolfram Sang
2012-02-24 15:03     ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-02-24 15:03       ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-02-25  3:51       ` Wolfram Sang [this message]
2012-02-25  3:51         ` Wolfram Sang
2012-02-25  8:45         ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-02-25  8:45           ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-02-25 15:46           ` Alan Stern
2012-02-25 15:46             ` Alan Stern
2012-02-26 10:01             ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-02-26 10:01               ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-02-26 15:59               ` Alan Stern
2012-02-26 15:59                 ` Alan Stern
2012-02-27 14:03                 ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-02-27 14:03                   ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-02-27 16:42                   ` Alan Stern
2012-02-27 16:42                     ` Alan Stern
2012-02-27 22:01                     ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-02-27 22:01                       ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-02-28 15:01                       ` Alan Stern
2012-02-28 15:01                         ` Alan Stern
2012-02-28 15:53                         ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-02-28 15:53                           ` Arnd Bergmann
2012-02-28 16:51                           ` Alan Stern
2012-02-28 16:51                             ` Alan Stern
2012-02-25 14:03         ` Roland Stigge
2012-02-25 14:03           ` Roland Stigge

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20120225035128.GA4455@pengutronix.de \
    --to=w.sang@pengutronix.de \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.