From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: joerg Reisenweber Subject: Re: Nokia N900: musb is in wrong state after boot Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2016 18:15:26 +0200 Message-ID: <2592499.y1ehgT9o2a@saturn> References: <201601091616.04193@pali> <86213272.dICX26rd7d@saturn> <20160610155940.GB28283@uda0271908> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20160610155940.GB28283@uda0271908> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Bin Liu Cc: Pali =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Roh=E1r?= , Tony Lindgren , Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, Ivaylo Dimitrov , Sebastian Reichel , Aaro Koskinen , Pavel Machek , Nishanth Menon , Felipe Balbi List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org On Fri 10 June 2016 10:59:40 Bin Liu wrote: > The musb ug says the testmde is not used in normal operation, so my > opinion is force_host should not be used for hacking n900 host mode if > this is for real product development or support. You're aware N900 OS aka maemo is a) FOSS, and b) EOL at least from Nokia's POV? So there's neither "product development" nor any _'official'_ support involved. And c) we (community) already _did_ use it since it was the only chance to make hostmode sort of work for N900, it's not like we could redesign N900 hardware to support regular hostmode, we need to work with what RL gave us. It evades me why you discourage resp reject this established solution. Just Nokia not supporting hostmode evidently doesn't mean we can't get anything done, and I don't see why we should refrain from doing so. /j -- () ascii ribbon campaign /\ against html e-mail - against proprietary attachments http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil.shtml http://www.nonhtmlmail.org/campaign.html http://www.georgedillon.com/web/html_email_is_evil_still.shtml http://www.gerstbach.at/2004/ascii/ (German)