RE: SL811 problem on mach-pxa
From: Frank Buss (fb_at_frank-buss.de)
Date: 02/17/05
- Previous message: Adrian Bunk: "Re: [2.6 patch] kill include/linux/eeprom.h"
- In reply to: David Brownell: "Re: SL811 problem on mach-pxa"
- Next in thread: David Brownell: "Re: SL811 problem on mach-pxa"
- Reply: David Brownell: "Re: SL811 problem on mach-pxa"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
To: "'David Brownell'" <david-b@pacbell.net> Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2005 20:11:28 +0100
> Some of that looks reasonable, not all. In particular, don't
> change the convention on resources (memory to i/o), or expect
> that the two regions involve more than one byte each ... the
> hardware only has two single-byte registers!
ok, perhaps I've misunderstood the meaning of IORESOURCE_IO and
IORESOURCE_MEM. Is IORESOURCE_IO for "outb" and "inb" (Intel assembler,
don't know the Arm aquivalent)? Then you are right, it should be
IORESOURCE_MEM, only, because anything is accessed as like accessing normal
memory. I didn't found much documention of such low-level kernel
programming.
> I'll look at the ep->hep stuff ... I could believe rc1 got a
> bug added there. The urb->hcpriv bit looks wrong though.
> It may take a little time for me to check it out though.
ok, thanks. If you have a new patch, I'll try it on my platform.
> > There is still an important error: When a device is
> > plugged, then opened and
> > then unplugged while open, it looks like the process
> > freezes, which opened the device
>
> That seems pretty odd; I certainly tested that (on 2.6.almost-10)
> as part of the initial development, and nothing in that area should
> have changed either in the sl811 driver or usbcore. I suspect the
> issue is one of the other changes you made.
perhaps you are right, I don't understand the interactions between the
driver and the USB framework in detail.
> Hmm, what platform were you using? I've had reports that one of the
> KARO boards has that issue.
The platform was developed by a company I'm working for as a freelancer for
a product the company sells.
> That looks like the sort of thing that
> should be done in the reset() routine rather than start();
> and it should
> certainly use a symbolic constant not 0x08.
do you mean sl811->board->reset? I don't know, where I have to setup the
function pointer, but looks ok for me to reset the controller (and all
plugged USB devices) in the probe function.
-- Frank Buß, fb@frank-buss.de http://www.frank-buss.de, http://www.it4-systems.de - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Previous message: Adrian Bunk: "Re: [2.6 patch] kill include/linux/eeprom.h"
- In reply to: David Brownell: "Re: SL811 problem on mach-pxa"
- Next in thread: David Brownell: "Re: SL811 problem on mach-pxa"
- Reply: David Brownell: "Re: SL811 problem on mach-pxa"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
