[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] usb: gadget: bcm63xx UDC driver

To: Kevin Cernekee <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: gadget: bcm63xx UDC driver
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 21:52:31 +0200
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <>,,,,
In-reply-to: <>
List-archive: <>
List-help: <>
List-id: linux-mips <>
List-owner: <>
List-post: <>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-subscribe: <>
List-unsubscribe: <>
References: <97cb21b8063a02a9664baf8b749ae200@localhost> <> <>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Sun, Aug 19, 2012 at 01:53:26PM -0700, Kevin Cernekee wrote:
> > According to this code, i in iudma[] can be in 1..5. You could have more 
> > than
> > one IRQ. The comment above this for loop is point less. So I think if you 
> > can
> > only have _one_ idma irq than you could remove the for loop in
> > bcm63xx_udc_data_isr().
> There are 6 IUDMA channels, and each one always has a dedicated
> interrupt line.  IRQ resource #0 is the control (vbus/speed/cfg/etc.)
> IRQ, and IRQ resources #1-6 are the IUDMA (IN/OUT data) IRQs.  Maybe
> it would be good to add a longer comment to clarify this?

Now that I look at the code again, I see what I've missed. So you can have
multiple irqs in the range #1-6. Why not pass the iudma struct then?
Passing the struct instead of a range is good thing.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>