Why do we even need that? If you take patch that makes ulpi_init a
subsys_initcall you won't have this problem, and no additional weird
hacks and errors will be needed
On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Sudip Mukherjee
sudipm.mukher...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 12:19:48AM -0700,
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 08:11:27PM -0700, David Cohen wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 08:09:54PM -0700, David Cohen wrote:
Hi,
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 10:07:05AM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
Many drivers and modules depend on ULPI bus registeration to
register ULPI interfaces and drivers.
On Thu, May 21, 2015 at 04:57:52PM +0800, Lu Baolu wrote:
ULPI registers its bus at module_init, so if the bus fails to register, the
module will fail to load and all will be well in the world.
However, if the ULPI code is built-in rather than a module, the bus
initialization may fail, but
Aww, that's too bad. Let me know if you'd like me to test a modified version
when you get the time.
--Mike Mammarella
On May 21, 2015, at 4:18 AM, Mathias Nyman wrote:
Hi
The fix went upstream, but caused regression for other users, and had to be
reverted.
The cause of the regression
On Fri, May 22, 2015 at 11:33:57AM +, Yoshihiro Shimoda wrote:
Hi Arnd,
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 8:07 PM
After the renesas_usbhs driver is enabled in ARM multi_v7_defconfig,
we now get a new warning:
renesas_usbhs/mod.c: In function 'usbhs_interrupt':
FunctionFS is very specific, because read/write operations are
directly translated into USB requests, which are asynchronous, so
you cannot use O_NONBLOCK.
If you need non-blocking API you can use Asynchronous I/O (AIO). You
can find some examples in kernel sources
-Original Message-
From: Greg KH [mailto:g...@kroah.com]
Sent: Monday, September 29, 2014 11:56 AM
To: Badola Nikhil-B46172
Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers: usb :fsl: Add support for USB controller
version-
2.5
On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 03:46:02AM
Hello,
I see your point and what you have done in patches.
I'm only showing you that you may achieve almost the same effect
without any changes in kernel.
I tested wstunnel.
The performance comparison in my environment is as following.
Round trip time of keyboard key down and up URBs at
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 03:33:26PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
ULPI registers it's bus at module_init so if the bus fails to register, the
module will fail to load and all will be well in the world.
However, if the ULPI code is built-in rather than a module, the bus
initialization may fail but
On Sun, May 24, 2015 at 12:19:48AM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 03:33:26PM -0400, Sasha Levin wrote:
ULPI registers it's bus at module_init so if the bus fails to register, the
module will fail to load and all will be well in the world.
However, if the ULPI code is
10 matches
Mail list logo
