Hi, -----Original Message----- From: Felipe Balbi [mailto:balbi@xxxxxx] Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2014 8:57 PM To: Gupta Suresh-B42813 Cc: balbi@xxxxxx; gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-usb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Gupta Suresh-B42813 Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: gadget: fsl: Set dma_ops for FSL USB Gadget Device Hi, On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 07:37:12PM +0530, Suresh Gupta wrote: > From: Suresh Gupta <B42813@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> return -ENOLOG > Signed-off-by: Suresh Gupta <B42813@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/usb/gadget/fsl_udc_core.c | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/fsl_udc_core.c > b/drivers/usb/gadget/fsl_udc_core.c > index 35b20e6..2a43d9d 100644 > --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/fsl_udc_core.c > +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/fsl_udc_core.c > @@ -2456,6 +2456,7 @@ static int __init fsl_udc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > /* Setup gadget.dev and register with kernel */ > dev_set_name(&udc_controller->gadget.dev, "gadget"); > udc_controller->gadget.dev.of_node = pdev->dev.of_node; > + set_dma_ops(&udc_controller->gadget.dev, > +pdev->dev.archdata.dma_ops); why is the driver doing this ? Why is the driver given knowledge about details on archdata ? Why do you need this at all ? [SuresH] This is due to moving mapping virtual address functions to common "udc-core.c" where for example the dma_map_single expect dma_ops of gadget device. Before we call this function from our file with argument dma_map_single(ep->udc->gadget.dev.parent,..... ---- Thanks SuresH -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
