On Wednesday, August 05, 2015 at 12:54:38 PM, LEMIEUX, SYLVAIN wrote:
Hi Marek,
Is it OK to only submit the patch that need to be update as a new version or I always have to resubmit the complete set of patches?
It's OK to submit just the patch, see "Sending updated patch versions" at http://www.denx.de/wiki/U-Boot/Patches#General_Patch_Submission_Rules
See comments and question below.
Sylvain
-----Original Message----- From: Marek Vasut [mailto:marex@denx.de]
On Tuesday, August 04, 2015 at 11:04:42 PM, slemieux.tyco@gmail.com wrote:
From: Sylvain Lemieux slemieux@tycoint.com
Incorporate USB driver from legacy LPCLinux NXP BSP. The files taken from the legacy patch are:
- lpc32xx USB driver
- lpc3250 header file USB registers definition.
The legacy driver was updated and clean-up as part of the integration with the latest u-boot.
Signed-off-by: Sylvain Lemieux slemieux@tycoint.com
Hi!
+static int wait_for_bit(void *reg, const uint32_t mask, bool set) +{
- unsigned int timeout = 1000000;
- uint32_t val;
- while (--timeout) {
Where did the get_timer() stuff disappear ? :'-(
I reused the "wait_for_bit()" from " drivers/usb/host/dwc2.c"; this implement does not use "get_timer()".
Should I update this driver implementation of "wait_for_bit()" to use "get_timer()" or keep it the same as the implementation from "dwc2.c"?
If you feel like it, that'd be nice. Sorry for not being explicit about keeping the get_timer() .
val = readl(reg);if (!set)val = ~val;if ((val & mask) == mask)return 0;udelay(1);- }
- debug("%s: Timeout (reg=%p mask=%08x wait_set=%i)\n",
__func__, reg, mask, set);- return -ETIMEDOUT;
+}
[...]