Hi, On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 03:12:11PM +0200, Koen Kooi wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 02:43:00PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: > >> On 03.04.2013 14:04, Felipe Balbi wrote: > >>> On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 02:00:23PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: > >> > >>>> Felipe, could you explain the background on how the dsps driver is > >>>> supposed to work in host mode at boot time with the rework of the driver > >>>> you did for 3.7? It might just be me not understanding the rationale > >>>> behind all these changes, but appearantly, I'm not the only one who's > >>>> affected by that. > >>> > >>> right, so the idea with that was to drop the huge amount of ifdeferry > >>> hack from the MUSB driver. It would be great if someone would send > >>> *CLEAN* patches adding Kconfig-based role choices again. > >> > >> Are Kconfig-based rules really what we want here after all? Wouldn't > >> run-time configured settings make much more sense, considering that > > > > we need both. Say that you want to build a product with MUSB hardwired > > as host, why would you enable gadget framework ? > > > > I can think of at least am335x where this would be perfectly plausible > > (no EHCI available, only MUSB). > > Nice that you mention am335x, since the beaglebone has 2 MUSB > controllers: one hardwired as host and one hardwired as slave. So how > will KConfig options solve that? you can't be asking this... are you serious ? For beaglebone it won't help in anything, but beaglebone is nothing but *ONE* user of am335x. You need to consider a product, what if someone decides to build a product with am335x but uses either a single port in host-only mode (or peripheral-only) or, both ports in same mode ? Will that not help ? Spend 5 minutes thinking harder before sending this attack emails. -- balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
