On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 04:15:49PM +0300, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 04:04:24PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > > > > - usb_otg_mode left in struct usb_phy > > > > > > > > do you still callit usb_otg_mode ? > > > > > > They are defined in OTG spec so why not. > > > > because they are not OTG-specific as I said before. The only states > > which are OTG-specific is A_DEVICE and B_HOST. You need to keep in mind > > that the OTG specification builds on top of USB specification. > > > > Furthermore, current OTG is called "OTG and Embedded Hosts", which > > should already be enough to say 'this isn't OTG-specific'. > > Very well, we'll call it usb_mode? usb_phy_mode ? usb_transceiver_mode ? You still have to refer it to the transceiver somehow, IMO -- balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
