Hello Daniel, >> There are indeed 2 routes: >> 1. If you need a serial console, you can still use it with the older >> usbtty code. >> 2. Adapt the new CDC layer such that it becomes suitable for console >> purposes as well. I would be happy integrating patches for this in the >> USB branch. That would allow us to migrate to 1 usb-gadget layer in >> the future which can be kept close to the linux development.
> If we were to take option 1 then what do you propose would be the easiest > way of integrating the current usbtty implementation with the AT91 USB > device. Is a 'wrapper' between the two frameworks practical or would we be > better off writing a new UDC implementation for AT91 that matches the other > implementations. Well, the benefit of writing a wrapper is that new devices can be integrated with a lot less effort, because it can be almost be copy-pasted from linux. Bugfixes in Linux can be easier integrated in U-boot as well. Writing a new implementation would be code duplication. So, I would prefer a wrapper. > For option 2, I think we need to take serial.c and u_serial.c from Linux and > then make them work with the uBoot console framework. Is this correct? Yes. >> > Also, if this is the >> > way to go, could someone confirm which version of the Linux Gadget >> > framework ether.c and friends are based on. It appears to be completely >> > different to the latest version. >> >> It is a port from Linux 2.6.27 to U-boot. >> Latest kernel changes are not integrated yet. But the port was kept >> quite close to the original code to make it easier to upgrade later >> on. > > OK, we'll have a look at that version as a starting point. I presume you > mean the original 2.6.27, not any of the 2.6.27.x series. OK, 2.6.27, not 2.6.27.x Kind Regards, Remy _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
