Hi lists: Tony Lin has submitted Freescale mx28 USB Patch at August (See: http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg50201.html), but it hasn't been accepted. I would like to re-submit mx28 usb patches, before that, I would like get some suggestion from you. I think your suggestion will also be benefit for coming mx53, mx50 and mx6q's submission. All Recently Freescale SoC's USB controller are the same, they are mx23, mx25, mx28, mx31, mx35, mx37, mx50, mx51, mx53, and mx6. But, the transceiver is different between them mx23, mx28, mx6 (Transceiver A) mx25 mx31, mx35,mx37, mx50, mx51, mx53 (Transceiver B) Current upstream platform information: mx23 mx28 ==> mxs platfrom others (including mx6) ==> mxc platform Current upstream USB information: mx25, mx3x, mx51: ehci-mxc.c (host), fsl_mxc_udc.c(device, main functions are at fsl_udc_core.c) My plan of submitting mx28 (mx53,mx50, mx6 later if possible): 1. Replace cpu_is_mxxx() with struct platform_device_id for ehci-mxc.c and fsl_mxc_udc.c 2. Using ehci-mxc.c and fsl_mxc_udc.c for mx28 upstreaming. For Step 2, I have concern that whether mxs platform users will be confused of their usb driver named xxx_mxc, not xxx_mxs? If mxs maintainers think it will cause confusion, I would like to change names to ehci-imx.c and fsl_imx_udc.c for all recent Freescale SoC's (from mx23 to mx6), is it suitable? 3. Create transceiver driver for mx28, and it will also be used for mx6. Best regards, Peter Chen MAD Linux BSP Team Freescale Semiconductor Ltd. -- 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
