Hi
> >
> > MODULE_DESCRIPTION (DRIVER_DESC);
> > MODULE_AUTHOR ("David Brownell");
> > @@ -220,6 +223,7 @@ static inline struct dummy *gadget_dev_to_dummy
> (struct device *dev)
> > }
> >
> > static struct dummy *the_controller;
> > +static struct dummy *the_ss_controller;
>
> the only thing I don't like, is why you splitted the ss controller to a
> separate controller. Why don't you use the same ? From SW perspective,
> we can treat SS and HS/FS/LS controllers as one unit.
>
Actually I'm not sure about that... Because SS controller handles things a
bit differently than HS/FS/LS. For example look at set_ss_link_state(), the
port status is reported differently than for HS/FS/LS devices.
It could be done, I mean spare the the_ss_controller variable and use
the_controller, and we did that at first, but later on we decided to go back
to this implementation since the code got too complex. Since dummy_hcd.c is
used for debugging purposes we decided that simplicity is the better
approach here.
Best regards,
Tanya Brokhman
Consultant for Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum
--
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
