Sebastian, On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > * Bin Liu | 2013-07-23 13:23:57 [-0500]: > >>Hi Sebastian, > Hi Liu, > >>On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 1:09 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior < >>bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >>> This patch renames the type struct from ti81xx_driver_data to >>> am33xx_driver_data since it is not used for ti81xx anymore. The EOI >>> member is also removed since the am33xx SoC does not have such register. >>> The interrupt is acknowledged by writting into the stat register. >>> >>I guess the EOI register is removed from the TRM because AM33xx does not >>use it, there is no need to write to it to acknowledge. It does not hurt to >>write to it though since the register still exists, it just does nothing, I >>guess. > > Is it really there or was it never there and it has been added to TRM by > accident? The EOI register IS in the USB subsystem of AM33xx, but the SoC does not use it because it uses level triggering for USB interrupt. > >>But I am not sure if it is a good idea to remove eoi from the musb_dsps >>driver. If the intension is to merge the support for other SoC, such as >>AM35xx, AM18xx, then EOI handling might be still needed. I just don't know >>how those devices use EOI. > > If one of the architectures gets added which need an EOI then the offset > can be 0 and the EOI will happen only if it is != 0. This patch cleaned up the use of EOI. Do you mean EOI handling will be added back with condition EOI offset != 0, when the support of new device which uses EIO is added? Regards, -Bin. > >> >>Regards, >>-Bin. > > Sebastian -- 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
