From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.kundenserver.de (mout.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3r5BK55TvszDqCm for ; Thu, 12 May 2016 21:56:09 +1000 (AEST) From: Arnd Bergmann To: Christian Lamparter Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Felipe Balbi , linux-mips@linux-mips.org, johnyoun@synopsys.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, a.seppala@gmail.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Subject: Re: usb: dwc2: regression on MyBook Live Duo / Canyonlands since 4.3.0-rc4 Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 13:55:44 +0200 Message-ID: <2924514.Pic5Z1NUsc@wuerfel> In-Reply-To: <7745292.ZB3149zIk7@debian64> References: <4231696.iL6nGs74X8@debian64> <5347627.S9K7mIusOJ@wuerfel> <7745292.ZB3149zIk7@debian64> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thursday 12 May 2016 11:58:18 Christian Lamparter wrote: > > > > Detecting the endianess of the > > > > device is probably the best future-proof solution, but it's also > > > > considerably more work to do in the driver, and comes with a > > > > tiny runtime overhead. > > > > > > The runtime overhead is probably non-measurable compared with the cost > > > of the actual MMIOs. > > > > Right. The code size increase is probably measurable (but still small), > > the runtime overhead is not. > > Ok, so no rebuts or complains have been posted. > > I've tested the patch you made in: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/5/9/354 > and it works: > > Tested-by: Christian Lamparter > > So, how do we go from here? There is are two small issues with the > original patch (#ifdef DWC2_LOG_WRITES got converted to lower case: > #ifdef dwc2_log_writes) and I guess a proper subject would be nice. > > Arnd, can you please respin and post it (cc'd stable as well)? > So this is can be picked up? Or what's your plan? (I just realized my reply was stuck in my outbox, so the patch went out first) If I recall correctly, the rough consensus was to go with your longer patch in the future (fixed up for the comments that BenH and I sent), and I'd suggest basing it on top of a fixed version of my patch. Felipe just had another idea, to change the endianess of the dwc2 block by setting a registers (if that exists). That would indeed be preferable, then we can just revert the broken change that went into 4.4 and backport that fix instead. Arnd