Am 30.01.2013 01:44, schrieb Kuo-Jung Su:
2013/1/29 Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de mailto:afaer...@suse.de
Gerd, what are your thoughts? If Kuo-Jung doesn't mind, I would offer to
send a v2 implementing the changes I suggested in the way you prefer.
Don't worry about me, I'm
2013/1/31 Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de:
Am 30.01.2013 01:44, schrieb Kuo-Jung Su:
2013/1/29 Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de mailto:afaer...@suse.de
Gerd, what are your thoughts? If Kuo-Jung doesn't mind, I would offer to
send a v2 implementing the changes I suggested in the way
Am 29.01.2013 06:43, schrieb Kuo-Jung Su:
From: Kuo-Jung Su dant...@faraday-tech.com
Add Faraday FUSBH200 support, which is slightly different from EHCI spec.
(Or maybe simply a bad/wrong implementation...)
Signed-off-by: Kuo-Jung Su dant...@faraday-tech.com
Cc: Gerd Hoffmann
This is not what I had in mind. For one thing your initialization does
not need to go before sysbus_init_{irq,mmio}.
What I am not too sure about without digging out SysBus and PCI EHCI
sources is at which point the fields may get modified. In 1/2 your new
fields are only ever initialized
2013/1/29 Andreas Färber afaer...@suse.de
Am 29.01.2013 06:43, schrieb Kuo-Jung Su:
From: Kuo-Jung Su dant...@faraday-tech.com
Add Faraday FUSBH200 support, which is slightly different from EHCI spec.
(Or maybe simply a bad/wrong implementation...)
Signed-off-by: Kuo-Jung Su
From: Kuo-Jung Su dant...@faraday-tech.com
Add Faraday FUSBH200 support, which is slightly different from EHCI spec.
(Or maybe simply a bad/wrong implementation...)
Signed-off-by: Kuo-Jung Su dant...@faraday-tech.com
Cc: Gerd Hoffmann kra...@redhat.com
Cc: Andreas afaer...@suse.de
Cc: Peter
