On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 8:34 PM, Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 29 Jun 2011, Jassi Brar wrote: > >> >> Well, yes may be not many changes. >> >> gadget_is_dualspeed() should simply be a wrapper for gadget->is_dualspeed >> >> CONFIG_USB_GADGET_DUALSPEED should be completely removed. >> > >> > No, it should not. It provides a way for gadget drivers to know _at >> > compile time_ whether they need to provide HS descriptors. >> > >> IMHO Gadget drivers need not be specified at _compile_ time if they >> could be used over high speed UDC. The gadget drivers should simply >> support HS descriptors too and decide at runtime if they need to use them. > > Why? > > If you're building an embedded system with limited memory, and you know > the UDC on that system isn't capable of running at high speed, why > should the gadget driver include HS descriptors? > Because a) We can(do already?) tag descriptors __initdata b) Esp when we talk about enabling gadget stack to play nice for embedded linux distributions, I doubt if any distribution would compile any gadget driver without CONFIG_USB_GADGET_DUALSPEED. -- 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
