Dear Sascha Hauer, > On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 07:49:37PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > > > > > > Why do you call this driver imx-otg when it is actually MXS > > > > > > specific? How would you call a corresponding driver for the > > > > > > remaining i.MX processors? > > > > > > > > > > This is the driver for the all i.MX processors. > > > > > > > > If it is for all i.MX processors, it shouldn't access MXS specific > > > > registers, like: > > > > + writel(wakeup, x->io_priv + HW_USBPHY_CTRL_SET); > > > > > > Indeed not. This should be done in the phy driver. > > > > Ok, so now you figured out that all these set_host() set_peripheral() > > work() calls should be back in the phy driver, not in the imx-otg? hm > > ... so back to the V4 of the patchset? > > Not really, you are just not allowed to put phy code into imx-otg.c, > because the phy may be another one on a different SoC. > > That said, I am a bit confused at the moment. There seems to be no > method to activate the interrupt in the phy. There is more to be confused about -- you don't get the host/device connection interrupt from the PHY, but you dig one of them from the EHCI host and the other from the EHCI host too -- which is pretty messed up already. We can certainly use IRQF_SHARED to trap some of the interrupts in the PHY code, but that's still quite weird. > Sascha Best regards, Marek Vasut -- 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
