On Sat, 11 Oct 2014, Kevin Cernekee wrote: > On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 8:09 AM, Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 10 Oct 2014, Kevin Cernekee wrote: > > > >> These quirks are currently set through platform_data; allow DT-based SoCs > >> to use them too. > > > > It looks strange to have the platform_data version of the quirks set in > > one routine and the DT version set in a different routine. Is there > > any reason not to set all of them in ohci_platform_probe? That would > > allow us to eliminate ohci_platform_reset. > > I think it is mostly for historical reasons. In Hauke's original > driver submission (commit fa3364b5a2d79), all of the platform_data > checks were in ohci_platform_reset(). > > Prior to commit 928fb68e2357be (make ohci-platform a separate driver) > it looks like there were some ordering dependencies involving calls to > ohci_hcd_init(): > > commit 2b16e39ee0a431d6cf6e6ca33bb08ec7dc82073f > Author: Florian Fainelli <florian@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Mon Oct 8 15:11:26 2012 +0200 > > USB: ohci: allow platform driver to specify the number of ports > > This patch modifies the ohci platform driver to accept the num_ports > parameter to be set via platform_data. Setting the number of ports must be > done after the call to ohci_hcd_init(). > > > But that doesn't seem to be the case anymore, and in my tests with the > DT num-ports patch, I never saw ohci->num_ports getting overwritten. > > Would you like me to submit another patch to move the remaining > platform_data tests from ohci_platform_reset() into > ohci_platform_probe()? Yes, that would be good. Alan Stern -- 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
