From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bryan O'Donoghue Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 22:43:27 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot-Users] USB device configuration In-Reply-To: <20070509091930.GD11070@enneenne.com> References: <20070509090311.GC11070@enneenne.com> <20070509091930.GD11070@enneenne.com> Message-ID: <20070509224327.41b3935a@localhost.localdomain> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Wed, 9 May 2007 11:19:31 +0200 Rodolfo Giometti wrote: > I think that the correct sequence into usbtty should be: > > @@ -554,11 +554,11 @@ int drv_usbtty_init (void) > usbtty_init_strings (); > usbtty_init_instances (); > > + usbtty_init_endpoints (); > + > udc_startup_events (device_instance);/* Enable dev, init > udc pointers */ udc_connect (); /* Enable pullup for host > detection */ > - usbtty_init_endpoints (); > - > /* Device initialization */ > memset (&usbttydev, 0, sizeof (usbttydev)); > > Comments? Greetings Rodolfo. Apologies, for the late response, sometimes I work/sleep without checking my home mail and missed this for ~ 48 hours. Umm, *provisionally* this appears not to be a problem for usbdcore_mpc8xx.c... just having a quick scan of usbdcore_omap1510 I don't immediately see a way that code could be broken by such a change... *then again* keep in mind when I was mucking with the usbtty stuff, I specifically tried *not* to change the order that things happen in, for fear of breaking other people's - omap stuff. Perhaps someone using the omap1510 in USB device mode would be in a better position to make a statement on that. In this specific instance though we _should_ be safe enough. Even still when you submit your modifications to the list, I'll ensure I do a test run from the POV of usbdcore_mpc8xx, just to make sure your code doesn't break my code ! Best, Bryan