> On 21 Mar 2018, at 21:54, Hans Petter Selasky <h...@selasky.org> wrote:
>
> On 03/21/18 17:45, Andrew Turner wrote:
>>> On 21 Mar 2018, at 15:37, Hans Petter Selasky <h...@selasky.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 03/21/18 16:24, Kyle Evans wrote:
>>>>> + {
>>>>> + .ep_end = 7,
>>>>> + .ep_fifosz_shift = 9,
>>>>> + .ep_fifosz_reg = MUSB2_VAL_FIFOSZ_512 | MUSB2_MASK_FIFODB,
>>>>> + },
>>>> I'm afraid I'm not familiar with this- why did .ep_fifosz_shift for
>>>> this case drop to 9? frx = 10 in the temp < 8 case in the removals of
>>>> the following hunks. Mostly curious because the others seemed to stay
>>>> the same.
>>>
>>> Hi Andrew,
>>>
>>> It might be an idea to keep the fifosz_shift at 10, else high-speed BULK
>>> traffic won't be double buffered, and this might affect performance.
>> Should the endpoint 1 size also be fixed? The register has it at 4k, but it
>> wasn’t an 8k buffer.
>
> No, because High-Speed BULK will only use 512 byte packets, and 4k is
> reserved for isochronous, which doesn't need double buffering at the moment.
Ok, in that case should we remove the double buffer flag on endpoint 1? The
Linux driver seems to always use a 512 byte buffer there, and always doubles
the offset increment when the double buffer flag is set.
Andrew
_______________________________________________
svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
