Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752877AbcLGMox (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Dec 2016 07:44:53 -0500 Received: from mga04.intel.com ([192.55.52.120]:62021 "EHLO mga04.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751742AbcLGMow (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Dec 2016 07:44:52 -0500 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.33,310,1477983600"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="37876922" From: Felipe Balbi To: Roger Quadros , John Youn Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] usb: dwc3: gadget: Fix full speed mode In-Reply-To: <4b44adf6-7569-71bf-b4c6-e811aeebfd1d@ti.com> References: <1480416997-19757-1-git-send-email-rogerq@ti.com> <1480416997-19757-2-git-send-email-rogerq@ti.com> <87k2bmo662.fsf@linux.intel.com> <4b44adf6-7569-71bf-b4c6-e811aeebfd1d@ti.com> Date: Wed, 07 Dec 2016 14:43:43 +0200 Message-ID: <87h96flxj4.fsf@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1943 Lines: 55 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Roger Quadros writes: >>> Roger Quadros writes: >>>> DCFG.DEVSPD =3D=3D 0x3 is not valid and we need to set >>>> DCFG.DEVSPD to 0x1 for full speed mode. >>> >>> seems like it has been made invalid somewhere between 1.73a and >>> 2.60a. Can you figure it out from Documentation why and when it was made >>> invalid? We might need revision checks here. >>> >>=20 >> I'll try to dig out more. > > I couldn't figure out more information on this. The changelogs in the TRMs > don't capture this change and I don't have access to all TRM versions > so I can't say which version it got changed and why. > > Can we please involve someone from Synopsis to provide this information? > Thanks. John, could you help us with this query? We'd like to understand why one of the FULLSPEED modes got removed. Do we need a revision check or can we assume that the other mode was never supposed to be used? thanks =2D-=20 balbi --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEElLzh7wn96CXwjh2IzL64meEamQYFAlhIA/8ACgkQzL64meEa mQZfaA//UMb3lKydIKRw8LHO06dyhAzSRULSriJI/DGB1VH4bNbthBgSgrGUpOa4 1I/j8FeHW2jigLakZjzYTpX8D9h/Q+Zz02dGzCZgTBuaqQGKhxp0x2q9F+qs8vFz hle/p+I6cVFpgtt+3MCQE9dLk/4fSqVeHaPapTF3FKZd8f4AVPCQimN4jTLtR0B0 FTiVs0TmMY2h002rfQcZqViVJ6kBHEwgNjW0zMtyaDQ+MwfNXYu/18gp/RTc2lPQ 1zqcGcV1WDvPOIPTYs9CG9kaLEUn2IzV9xOjuFDYXijlrGPcHOPFJqvO+VdqRdvF zNXM2Lto9TZtEj/MV1Y3sWV8r6idFh3ahmbKBmJAGGCEDv5oqk6WAtSrSA7RJ4Cf kTfg0fC7jQNKr4r3aMOleE0W4bqHs2mEDCZUa8GwbpyljD05aGQsZTCD5vsFzn68 rAqa337o4tT/eTz6HSXbIRr1RsRpoLJgqVPs4OiKaOih36d9PWxO8dVpbp5Jrjse Ukn6wT56sFEKCTrW6EyOV1i8Y4kfz9bXKC8PwbjpFXpisXModD48QHHgmPoNeMZ4 aazQlhphDdPA9+8tnwngTk+JjNwysAijYSpl+6i4w2fSGqJVCXPabVS5kWJRGFzg p7/wAQz0jspf1jFrYzQvh/lScsGVXC3npNUsaewS4cS+qcwLT0U= =m3VW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--