Hi,
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 04:50:42PM +0200, Roger Quadros wrote:
> On 11/21/2012 03:45 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 04:34:07PM +0200, Roger Quadros wrote:
> >> For some platforms e.g. OMAP5, we cannot rely on USBHOST revision
> >> to determine the number of ports available
On 11/21/2012 03:45 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 04:34:07PM +0200, Roger Quadros wrote:
>> For some platforms e.g. OMAP5, we cannot rely on USBHOST revision
>> to determine the number of ports available. In such cases we have
>
> you need to make it clear *why* we can't. Imagi
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 04:34:07PM +0200, Roger Quadros wrote:
> For some platforms e.g. OMAP5, we cannot rely on USBHOST revision
> to determine the number of ports available. In such cases we have
you need to make it clear *why* we can't. Imagine someone reading this 5
years from now... he'll be
For some platforms e.g. OMAP5, we cannot rely on USBHOST revision
to determine the number of ports available. In such cases we have
to rely on platform data (or FDT) to give us the right number of
ports.
Signed-off-by: Roger Quadros
---
arch/arm/mach-omap2/usb-host.c|1 +
arch/arm/pl
