On Tue, 28 Sep 2010, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 17:18, Paul Walmsley wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Sep 2010, Mike Frysinger wrote: > >> well, currently, your resource definition must always be in the order > >> of dev int and then dma int. Âif it isnt, then i dont think musb is > >> going to work. > >> > >> not sure why you wouldnt simply change your platform resources to > >> match the what the driver expects ... > > > > The resource data is getting automatically populated from a set of data > > generated from TI's hardware database for the OMAP platform, at least. > > While we could hack in some exceptions to that tool to generate resources > > in a specific order, it seems less fragile to use the resource name > > instead. ÂThat way, no matter what order the resources are generated, the > > driver should still work. > > guessing you're not referring to a device tree setup, but something > even more convoluted ? No need to disparage it before you've seen it :-) > i'd highly suggest that this patch be resent with the info you've just > provided in its changelog so people can get a better understanding of > the "why" ... i'm not against the patch, it just seemed to be lacking > any background info Hema, would you care to update the patch changelog accordingly? - Paul
