From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: b-liu@ti.com (Bin Liu) Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 08:47:56 -0500 Subject: [PATCH v2 2/3] musb: sunxi: Remove custom babble handling In-Reply-To: References: <20160922111901.15337-1-hdegoede@redhat.com> <20160922111901.15337-2-hdegoede@redhat.com> <20160922135415.GB31827@uda0271908> <39199bd7-a372-0312-6177-5b0fc2d683ac@redhat.com> <20160922143050.GC31827@uda0271908> Message-ID: <20160923134756.GE31827@uda0271908> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 04:42:26PM +0300, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 09/22/2016 05:30 PM, Bin Liu wrote: > >Hi, > > > >On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 05:03:39PM +0300, Hans de Goede wrote: > >>Hi, > >> > >>On 09/22/2016 04:54 PM, Bin Liu wrote: > >>>Hi, > >>> > >>>On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 02:19:00PM +0300, Hans de Goede wrote: > >>>>The musb-core now a days always treats babble errors in host mode > >>> > >>>I don't think this statement is accurate. You might want to change it to > >>>"The musb core already handles babble interrupt" or something else. > >> > >>It is accurate if you look in the history at drivers/usb/musb > >>commits around 15-03-10 you will see 2 relevant commits: > >> > >>https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/drivers/usb/musb?id=b4dc38fd45b63e3da2bc98db5d283a15a637a2fa > >> > >>"usb: musb: core: simplify musb_recover_work()" > >> > >>This commits introduces calling musb_root_disconnect(musb) > >>on babble errors, that was not happening before which is why > > > >That is true, but calling musb_root_disconnect() is just one step of the > >recovery in musb core, not all. > > > >The statement of "treats babble errors in host mode as disconnects" > >implies all the babble handling is just disconnect, which is not > >accurate. > > Ok, I'll send out a v3 with an improved commit msg. Thanks. If Kishon gives his Acked-by, I will take all the 3 patches. Or I can just take the 2 musb patches into my tree. Regards, -Bin.