On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 3:33 PM, Roger Quadros <roger.quadros@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 10/20/2010 12:23 PM, ext Felipe Contreras wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Roger Quadros<roger.quadros@xxxxxxxxx> >> Âwrote: >>> USB_G_NOKIA just needs a USB gadget controller to work. The gadget >>> controller used for the board should come from the board's Kconfig which >>> will ideally be supplied by the board's vendor. >> >> Ok, but USB_OMAP is not supposed to work on the N900? (I tried and it >> didn't) > > No it won't work. USB_OMAP was for older OMAP's. MUSB is on OMAP3 and later. > But MUSB is not limited to OMAP SoC. config USB_GADGET_OMAP depends ARCH_OMAP So how about s/ARCH_OMAP/ARCH_OMAP1/ Then USB_GADGET_MUSB_HDRC would be selected by default on OMAP2+. >>> For example, can't USB_GADGET_MUSB_HDRC be selected in MACH_NOKIA_RX51 in >>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/Kconfig? or is there a better place to put it? >> >> I don't think so, because people might not want USB at all. The ideal >> case would be for USB_GADGET_MUSB_HDRC to be selected automatically >> when the user selects USB and USB_GADGET, but that's not happening >> because USB_GADGET_OMAP is selected first (all the dependencies are >> met). >> > Yes you are right. In think with the current setup (i.e. controller > selection at kconfig and limitation to one controller per config) we will > never be able to satisfy all users. > > We might need to move to some kind of gadget controller framework and > runtime controller selection to solve this problem. Definitely, for multi-omap. But for OMAP1/OMAP2+ setting ARCH_OMAP1 as I just suggested would do the trick. -- Felipe Contreras -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
