From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.175]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6810D67C21 for ; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 00:03:53 +1000 (EST) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id e2so817691ugf for ; Thu, 20 Jul 2006 07:03:52 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2006 22:03:52 +0800 From: "Li Yang" Sender: linuxppcleo@gmail.com To: "Kumar Gala" Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] [PATCH] Fix Freescale high-speed USB hostdependency In-Reply-To: <6DAE6213-B8D0-4226-9402-98B4F3FD907B@kernel.crashing.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed References: <4879B0C6C249214CBE7AB04453F84E4D07064D@zch01exm20.fsl.freescale.net> <93F26879-ECEB-4513-AA77-EE7285DF7961@kernel.crashing.org> <6DAE6213-B8D0-4226-9402-98B4F3FD907B@kernel.crashing.org> Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, gregkh@suse.de, linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 7/20/06, Kumar Gala wrote: > > On Jul 20, 2006, at 8:36 AM, Li Yang wrote: > > > On 7/20/06, Kumar Gala wrote: > >> > >> On Jul 20, 2006, at 6:42 AM, Li Yang-r58472 wrote: > >> > >> > Another one in header file. > >> > > >> > --- > >> > diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ehci.h b/drivers/usb/host/ehci.h > >> > index 679c1cd..8da2774 100644 > >> > --- a/drivers/usb/host/ehci.h > >> > +++ b/drivers/usb/host/ehci.h > >> > @@ -642,7 +642,7 @@ #endif > >> > > >> > > >> > / > >> > > >> *-------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> - > >> > - > >> > ---*/ > >> > > >> > -#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_83xx > >> > +#ifdef CONFIG_MPC834x > >> > /* Some Freescale processors have an erratum in which the TT > >> > * port number in the queue head was 0..N-1 instead of 1..N. > >> > */ > >> > >> Do we really want to make this change. What harm is there in having > >> the ehci support for MPC834x build on all 83xx processors? I can't > >> imagine we are going to config in support for ehci on anything that > >> is MPC834x at this point and if you do, your device tree isn't going > >> to have nodes in it so the drivers not going to bind against > >> anything. > >> > > > > It's not very harmful. But it will cause some misunderstanding. > > There were already some guys trying to use the 834x USB driver on 836x > > and 832x. Anyway, it's a trivial patch. Please apply if it doesn't > > cause much trouble. > > Is that more because the QE drivers aren't in the kernel tree? > > >> Finally, I got to believe Freescale's going to build some MPC83xx in > >> the future with the high speed USB IP. > > > > I can't tell exactly. But it's not likely to integrate this IP into a > > chip with QE/CPM support. As QE/CPM has already provided full speed > > USB support, and the USB speed is not very important for Netcomm > > processors. > > True, but not all 83xx are Netcomm processors. 83xx=PowerQUICC II Pro, IMHO. I just give my 2 cents. It's up to you to decide as you are the maintainer. :) > > - k > > _______________________________________________ > Linuxppc-dev mailing list > Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org > https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev >