On Wed, Nov 09, 2011 at 10:52:34AM +0200, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > Hi, > > On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 05:04:43PM +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 08:28:15PM +0530, ABRAHAM, KISHON VIJAY wrote: > > > > Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but sounds like you are still marrying > > > > OTG with transceivers. > > > I'm against the idea of usb_phy married with the transceiver (i.e > > > transceiver = twl6030 for instance) > > > > I think the source of confusion is the split phy functionality on OMAPs. > > twl6030 basically provides VBUS/ID comparators which communicate VBUS/ID > > levels to internal PHY via a well-defined mailbox. We need a > > good way to write that down in source code. > > OK, I think I understand now. So this issue is not in the scope of > these patches, right? probably not, still worth keeping it in mind ;-) -- balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
