From: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/1] USB: EHCI: Initialize multiple USB controllers at once
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 19:29:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201208141929.53020.marex@denx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4B9C9637D5087840A465BDCB251780E9E2D7650818@HKMAIL02.nvidia.com>
Dear Jim Lin,
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Marek Vasut [mailto:marex at denx.de]
> >Sent: Sunday, August 12, 2012 7:47 AM
> >To: Jim Lin
> >Cc: u-boot at lists.denx.de; Wolfgang Denk; Tom Warren
> >Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/1] USB: EHCI: Initialize multiple USB
> >controllers at once
> >
> >> diff --git a/common/cmd_usb.c b/common/cmd_usb.c index
> >> a8e3ae5..8d3093b 100644
> >> --- a/common/cmd_usb.c
> >> +++ b/common/cmd_usb.c
> >> @@ -554,7 +554,17 @@ int do_usb(cmd_tbl_t *cmdtp, int flag, int argc,
> >> char
> >> * const argv[]) }
> >>
> >> if (strncmp(argv[1], "tree", 4) == 0) {
> >>
> >> printf("\nDevice Tree:\n");
> >>
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_USB_MULTI
> >
> >How's this supposed to work? Shouldn't this call usb_show_tree on roots of
> >all the trees?
>
> You see the following if dev->parent is NULL that means it's the only root
> hub under a controller , then we show devices under this root hub of the
> controller by usb_show_tree. Root hub under different controller is listed
> as separate device.
So if you set USB_MAX_DEVICE to 1, this code won't need the ifdefs? :)
> >> + for (i = 0; i < USB_MAX_DEVICE; i++) {
> >> + dev = usb_get_dev_index(i);
> >> + if (dev == NULL)
> >> + break;
> >> + if (dev->parent == NULL)
> >> + usb_show_tree(dev);
> >> + }
> >> +#else
> >>
> >> usb_show_tree(usb_get_dev_index(0));
> >>
> >> +#endif
> >>
> >> return 0;
> >>
> >> }
> >> if (strncmp(argv[1], "inf", 3) == 0) { diff --git
> >>
> >> a/common/usb.c b/common/usb.c index 1b40228..065c70c 100644
> >> --- a/common/usb.c
> >> +++ b/common/usb.c
> >>
> >> +#endif
> >> + USB_PRINTF("scan end\n");
> >> + usb_started = 1;
> >> + return 0;
> >> + } else {
> >> + printf("Error, couldn't init Lowlevel part\n");
puts();
> >> + usb_started = 0;
> >> + return -1;
> >> + }
> >> +}
> >> +
> >> +/********************************************************************
> >> +*****
> >> ***** + * Stop USB this stops the LowLevel Part and deregisters USB
> >> devices. + */
> >> +int usb_stop(void)
> >> +{
> >> + int i;
> >> +
if (!started)
return 0;
... do the work ...
;-)
> >> + if (usb_started) {
> >> + asynch_allowed = 1;
> >> + usb_started = 0;
> >> + usb_hub_reset();
> >> + for (i = 0; i < CONFIG_USB_MAX_CONTROLLER_COUNT; i++)
> >> + usb_lowlevel_stop(i);
> >> + }
> >> + return 0;
> >> +}
> >> +#else
> >>
> >> /**********************************************************************
> >>
> >> * some forward declerations...
> >> */
> >>
> >> @@ -127,6 +210,7 @@ int usb_stop(void)
> >>
> >> }
> >> return res;
> >>
> >> }
> >>
> >> +#endif
> >>
> >> /*
> >>
> >> * disables the asynch behaviour of the control message. This is used
> >>
> >> for data @@ -750,11 +834,18 @@ struct usb_device
> >> *usb_get_dev_index(int index) return &usb_dev[index]; }
> >>
> >> -
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_USB_MULTI
> >
> >I still believe it's possible to get rid of this MULTI crap, simply set
> >the "multiness" to 1 for non-multi setups. How big overhead will that
> >generate?
>
> I assume you want me to use code in ifdef CONFIG_USB_MULTI block,
> remove CONFIG_USB_MULTI
Yes!
> and if CONFIG_USB_MAX_CONTROLLER_COUNT is 1
> , then do non-multi setups.
No ;-) Why can't the "multi setups" be used for "non-multi" configuration?
> nvpublic
> _______________________________________________
> U-Boot mailing list
> U-Boot at lists.denx.de
> http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-14 17:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-08 9:48 [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 1/1] USB: EHCI: Initialize multiple USB controllers at once Jim Lin
2012-08-11 23:46 ` Marek Vasut
2012-08-13 10:25 ` Jim Lin
2012-08-14 17:29 ` Marek Vasut [this message]
2012-08-14 4:22 ` Jim Lin
2012-08-14 16:18 ` Stephen Warren
2012-08-14 17:30 ` Marek Vasut
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-08-10 9:36 Jim Lin
2012-08-10 16:07 ` Stephen Warren
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=201208141929.53020.marex@denx.de \
--to=marex@denx.de \
--cc=u-boot@lists.denx.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox