Sebastian, On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 10:16 AM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 07/25/2013 05:12 PM, Bin Liu wrote: >> Sebastian, > > Hi Bin, > >>> 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. > > I see. > >>>> 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? > > That is my intention. Then should something like EOI cleanup be added into the commit message for better git log searching experience? I would think the EOI cleanup is more important then variable renaming in this patch. Or even better to separate the changes into two patches. > >> Regards, >> -Bin. > > Sebastian Regards, -Bin. -- 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
