Hi,
cristian.birsan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
> From: Cristian Birsan <cristian.birsan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Check fifo configuration values against device tree values for endpoint fifo
> in auto configuration mode (fifo_mode=0).
>
> Signed-off-by: Cristian Birsan <cristian.birsan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/usb/gadget/udc/atmel_usba_udc.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/atmel_usba_udc.c b/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/atmel_usba_udc.c
> index 2035906b..3fd43fb 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/atmel_usba_udc.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/atmel_usba_udc.c
> @@ -2118,14 +2118,34 @@ static struct usba_ep * atmel_udc_of_init(struct platform_device *pdev,
> dev_err(&pdev->dev, "of_probe: fifo-size error(%d)\n", ret);
> goto err;
> }
> - ep->fifo_size = fifo_mode ? udc->fifo_cfg[i].fifo_size : val;
> + if (fifo_mode) {
> + if (val < udc->fifo_cfg[i].fifo_size) {
> + dev_warn(&pdev->dev,
> + "of_probe: fifo-size table value not supported by HW, using DT value\n");
114 characters long. Is this even worth a warning? probably not.
--
balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
