On 01/03/2013 02:52 PM, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello.
>
> On 02-01-2013 19:00, Roger Quadros wrote:
>
>> Both OMAP4 and 5 exhibit the same revision ID in the REVISION register
>> but they have different number of ports i.e. 2 and 3 respectively.
>> So we can't rely on REVISION register for number of ports on OMAP5
>> and depend on platform data (or device tree) instead.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Roger Quadros <rogerq@xxxxxx>
> [...]
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/omap-usb-host.c b/drivers/mfd/omap-usb-host.c
>> index 5edb828..710460d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mfd/omap-usb-host.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/omap-usb-host.c
>> @@ -497,19 +497,27 @@ static int usbhs_omap_probe(struct
>> platform_device *pdev)
>> */
>> pm_runtime_put_sync(dev);
>>
>> - switch (omap->usbhs_rev) {
>> - case OMAP_USBHS_REV1:
>> - omap->nports = 3;
>> - break;
>> - case OMAP_USBHS_REV2:
>> - omap->nports = 2;
>> - break;
>> - default:
>> - omap->nports = OMAP3_HS_USB_PORTS;
>> - dev_dbg(dev,
>> - "USB HOST Rev : 0x%d not recognized, assuming %d ports\n",
>> - omap->usbhs_rev, omap->nports);
>> - break;
>> + /*
>> + * If platform data contains nports then use that
>> + * else make out number of ports from USBHS revision
>> + */
>> + if (pdata->nports) {
>> + omap->nports = pdata->nports;
>> + } else {
>> + switch (omap->usbhs_rev) {
>> + case OMAP_USBHS_REV1:
>> + omap->nports = 3;
>> + break;
>> + case OMAP_USBHS_REV2:
>> + omap->nports = 2;
>> + break;
>> + default:
>> + omap->nports = OMAP3_HS_USB_PORTS;
>> + dev_dbg(dev,
>> + "USB HOST Rev:0x%d not recognized, assuming %d ports\n",
>
> Please indent the string to the right somewhat, as it was before.
>
OK. I will fix it in the pull request e-mail that i'll send in a while
as a reply to the first message in this patchset.
--
cheers,
-roger
--
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
