On Apr 14, 2005, at 12:52 PM, David Brownell wrote:
On Wednesday 13 April 2005 1:30 pm, Jaroslav Flidr wrote:
Well, here is the patch I am using. Quite simple, really... (2.6.11
kernel):
Yes, thanks. It got line wrapped, but I can cope.
Just curious: with the exception of PXA27x and possibly iPaq
On Wednesday 13 April 2005 1:30 pm, Jaroslav Flidr wrote:
> Well, here is the patch I am using. Quite simple, really... (2.6.11
> kernel):
Yes, thanks. It got line wrapped, but I can cope.
> Just curious: with the exception of PXA27x and possibly iPaq who else
> is using ohci?
On PCs, names
Well, here is the patch I am using. Quite simple, really... (2.6.11
kernel):
--- a/drivers/usb/host/ohci-hcd.c 2005-04-13 16:10:34.0
-0400
+++ b/drivers/usb/host/ohci-hcd.c 2005-04-13 16:10:50.0
-0400
@@ -693,13 +693,16 @@
/* we can eliminate a (slow) ohci_r
On Tuesday 12 April 2005 3:18 pm, Jaroslav Flidr wrote:
> For those who are interested and still using SA-based architecture
> (e.g. ziti): the ohci-recommended way of handling the WDH interrupt -
> reading the done_head pointer and testing its LSB without reading the
> interrupt status regi
For those who are interested and still using SA-based architecture
(e.g. ziti): the ohci-recommended way of handling the WDH interrupt -
reading the done_head pointer and testing its LSB without reading the
interrupt status register must not be used. It appears that the SA
host controll
