On Tuesday 23 June 2009, Alek Du wrote: > On Wed, 24 Jun 2009 09:58:42 +0800 > David Brownell <david-b@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Thursday 11 June 2009, Alek Du wrote: > > > --- a/drivers/usb/core/hub.c > > > +++ b/drivers/usb/core/hub.c > > > @@ -1545,6 +1545,7 @@ static int usb_configure_device_otg(struct usb_device *udev) > > > err); > > > bus->b_hnp_enable = 0; > > > } > > > + usb_notify_otg_hnp_enable(udev); > > > } > > > } > > > } > > > > What makes this hardware so unlike other OTG hosts that it needs > > to add a hook at this level? > > > > There are other OTG implementations, and they didn't need this... > > David, > Because it is the first EHCI OTG controller driver. The notification is used > for OTG transceiver driver (already in linus git tree) to update its hw status. The fact that it's EHCI can't matter. There are two other OTG implementations and they were able to work just fine without a notification at this level. ISTR they had the hook from the HCD's root hub code, not from usbcore ... which is funky enough already! -- 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
