On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 7:58 AM, Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 10 Oct 2014, Kevin Cernekee wrote: > >> OHCI_QUIRK_FRAME_NO is currently set under either of the following >> conditions: >> >> 1) If a ppc-of-ohci DT node indicates a compatible string of >> "fsl,mpc5200-ohci" or "mpc5200-ohci" >> >> 2) If usb_ohci_pdata->no_big_frame_no is set >> >> For #1, the affected platforms already enable CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx. >> For #2, there are currently no in-tree users. >> >> So we can safely remove the #ifdef, and thereby allow OHCI_QUIRK_FRAME_NO >> to be used by other (non-PPC) platforms that have the same property. >> bcm63xx and bcm3384 are two such users. > > Sorry, but I can't understand this patch description. What #ifdef does > it refer to? It refers to "#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx". This check appears to be redundant: from what I can tell, it isn't ever necessary to gate the workaround logic based on CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx, because currently OHCI_QUIRK_FRAME_NO is only getting set for (some) mpc52xx chips. So, removing "#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx" both eliminates PPC-specific code from the generic driver, and allows bcm63xx/bcm3384 to make use of OHCI_QUIRK_FRAME_NO. > By comparing the description with the patch, it looks like you _wanted_ > to say something along these lines: > > The bcm63xx and bcm3384 platforms need to set > OHCI_QUIRK_FRAME_NO, but they are non-PPC platforms and > don't enable CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx. Therefore this patch changes > the code that uses OHCI_QUIRK_FRAME_NO, making it not depend > on CONFIG_PPC_MPC52xx. > > Does that properly describe what you are doing? Yes. -- 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
