On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 03:14:10PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > On 08/16/2012 11:31 AM, Roland Stigge wrote: > >USB_ISP1301 already depends on I2C. > > > >Maybe we should rather let USB_LPC32XX "depends on USB_ISP1301" instead > >of "select USB_ISP1301"? > > And your OHCI select has the same problem. So we make both things > depend on the transceiver instead of selecting it right? > > But now that I've seen the transceiver driver it is probably the > smallest one. if it depends on the transceiver, why do we have i2c transfers on those drivers ? They should be hidden by the usb_phy_*() calls. > Further questions: > - why is there "normal_i2c" ? > - why is that thing not doing anything at all? > > Couldn't you just move the transiver logic out of the UDC? And fail in > probe if it does not find one and get probed later again? I think we do > something like that in the device case where the interrupt controller > is not yet probed but the currently probed device requires it. > > Felipe, do we have a phy framework yet or is it still in work? it's still in the works, but it's getting there. -- balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
