On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 7:39 PM, Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Oct 02, 2015 at 01:18:27PM +0200, Peter Senna Tschudin wrote: >> fusbh200 and fotg210 are very similar. The initial idea was to consolidate >> both drivers but I'm afraid fusbh200 is not being used. >> >> This patch remove the fusbh200 source code, update Kconfig and two >> Makefiles. >> >> Signed-off-by: Peter Senna Tschudin <peter.senna@xxxxxxxxx> > > after all this work on these previous patches, you just remove fusbh200 ? > > that's a bit odd. Are you sure there are no users for this driver ? It has been > in tree since 2013. I don't know about users, but I could not find devices using fusbh200. The closest I got was: http://www.ebay.fr/itm/Digital-Video-Langzeit-Recorder-H264-DVR-3G-4-Kanal-/370525106495 But it only says: Main Processor: Faraday. I don't know which usb host controller it uses. The idea of deleting fusbh200 came from contacting the driver authors. I was asking where to find hw for testing, and I was told that the fusbh200 driver can be deleted. Also at least Fedora and Ubuntu build modules for these host controllers by default. If fusbh200 and fotg210 are only available integrated into SOCs, maybe building the modules by default for x86 is not a good idea. But if there are users I'll be happy to continue the integration work, even better if I find hardware for testing. John Feng-Hsin Chiang, can you confirm that from your side the fusbh200 driver can be deleted? For the patches I sent, 10 of 14 are for fotg210 which I'll fix and resend. -- Peter -- 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
