On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 10:43:56AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote: > On Tue, 18 Jun 2013, Yuan-Hsin Chen wrote: > > > > In that case, no, you should be figuring out how to refactor and reuse > > > the EHCI code instead of copying it straight into your driver. > > > > I was trying to use ehci-platform.c, anonymous union/struct, and quirk > > flags to avoid copying EHCI code. > > But there are too big incompatibilities between fotg210/fusbh200 > > controller and EHCI. > > That's why Alan agreed that I could create a stand-alone driver for > > fusbh200 host controller. > > Since fotg210 and fusbh200 have the same issue, fotg210 hcd is > > supposed to be stand-alone. > > More details please refer to mail sequence > > http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg83812.html > > That's right. The patch's description mentions some of the > incompatibilities. In short, the Faraday controllers are a _very_ > noncompliant EHCI variant. The changes needed to make ehci-hcd work > with them were too invasive IMO. > > It's a shame, because so much of the code is the same. It makes you > want to go back and ask those Faraday engineers what they were thinking > of at the time. Ah, ok, that's too bad. I understand why the code can't be refactored. Sarah Sharp -- 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
