On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 10:42:53AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jan 2015, Peter Chen wrote: > > > > > Hi Andy, Would you define pci_id at ci_hdrc_pci.c (instead of ehci-pci.c) > > > > at your platform code/table to fix this problem? > > > > I am not familiar with pci, but it works at other platforms, like ARM. > > > > > > You can't remove the definition of pci_id in ehci-pci.c; if you did > > > then ehci-pci wouldn't bind to PCI controllers. > > > > > > It may turn out that the best way to fix this is to include a quirk in > > > ehci-pci.c to prevent it from binding to the Intel MID on-board EHCI > > > controller. > > > > > > Alan Stern > > > > > > > Then, it is strange. Do we need even two glue layer drivers for pci > > device? Look at usb/chipidea/ci_hdrc_pci.c it has pci_register_driver, > > and its host driver will call ehci_init_driver, it is definitely > > duplicated with usb/host/ehci-pci.c. > > ehci-pci.c is a driver for a USB Host Controller, whereas ci_hdrc_pci.c > is a driver for a USB Device Controller. > In fact, it is not, ci_hdrc_pci is the pci glue layer for chipidea driver. I am just wonder andy's v2 change is suitable or not, the right way should not call ehci_pci_init at all. -- Best Regards, Peter Chen -- 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
