[linux-usb-devel] [PATCH] Fix Freescale high-speed USB hostdependency

[Li Yang]

On 7/20/06, Kumar Gala <galak at kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
>
> On Jul 20, 2006, at 8:36 AM, Li Yang wrote:
>
> > On 7/20/06, Kumar Gala <galak at kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Jul 20, 2006, at 6:42 AM, Li Yang-r58472 wrote:
> >>
> >> > Another one in header file.
> >> >
> >> > ---
> >> > diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ehci.h b/drivers/usb/host/ehci.h
> >> > index 679c1cd..8da2774 100644
> >> > --- a/drivers/usb/host/ehci.h
> >> > +++ b/drivers/usb/host/ehci.h
> >> > @@ -642,7 +642,7 @@ #endif
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > /
> >> >
> >> *--------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> -
> >> > -
> >> > ---*/
> >> >
> >> > -#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_83xx
> >> > +#ifdef CONFIG_MPC834x
> >> >  /* Some Freescale processors have an erratum in which the TT
> >> >   * port number in the queue head was 0..N-1 instead of 1..N.
> >> >   */
> >>
> >> Do we really want to make this change.  What harm is there in having
> >> the ehci support for MPC834x build on all 83xx processors?  I can't
> >> imagine we are going to config in support for ehci on anything that
> >> is MPC834x at this point and if you do, your device tree isn't going
> >> to have nodes in it so the drivers not going to bind against
> >> anything.
> >>
> >
> > It's not very harmful.  But it will cause some misunderstanding.
> > There were already some guys trying to use the 834x USB driver on 836x
> > and 832x.  Anyway, it's a trivial patch.  Please apply if it doesn't
> > cause much trouble.
>
> Is that more because the QE drivers aren't in the kernel tree?
>
> >> Finally, I got to believe Freescale's going to build some MPC83xx in
> >> the future with the high speed USB IP.
> >
> > I can't tell exactly.  But it's not likely to integrate this IP into a
> > chip with QE/CPM support.  As QE/CPM has already provided full speed
> > USB support, and the USB speed is not very important for Netcomm
> > processors.
>
> True, but not all 83xx are Netcomm processors.

83xx=PowerQUICC II Pro, IMHO.
I just give my 2 cents.  It's up to you to decide as you are the maintainer. :)
>
> - k
>
> _______________________________________________
> Linuxppc-dev mailing list
> Linuxppc-dev at ozlabs.org
> https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
>