Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Wed, 8 Jan 2020 09:37:07 +0530
From:   Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>
To:     John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@intel.com>,
        linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
        Yoshihiro Shimoda <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@renesas.com>,
        Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@googlemail.com>,
        linux-usb@vger.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@google.com>,
        Alistair Delva <adelva@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/4] usb: xhci: Add support for Renesas USB controllers
Message-ID: <20200108040707.GU2818@vkoul-mobl>
References: <20191106083843.1718437-1-vkoul@kernel.org>
 <CANcMJZDqX6-+naGEbBiyM+1cZS6jfMoP9bm5Uk4ZuP_mw5aNWw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CANcMJZDqX6-+naGEbBiyM+1cZS6jfMoP9bm5Uk4ZuP_mw5aNWw@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi John,

On 07-01-20, 11:51, John Stultz wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 12:40 AM Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > This series add support for Renesas USB controllers uPD720201 and uPD720202.
> > These require firmware to be loaded and in case devices have ROM those can
> > also be programmed if empty. If ROM is programmed, it runs from ROM as well.
> >
> > This includes two patches from Christian which supported these controllers
> > w/o ROM and later my patches for ROM support and multiple firmware versions.
> >
> 
> Hey Vinod!
>    In pushing this series to one of the Android trees for the db845c,
> there was some concern raised that this series is adding a lot of
> renesas specific logic to the more generic xhci-pci driver. There was
> some question if instead that logic should be added to its own
> file/module? Do you have any thoughts on this?

TBH I have not thought about that and in previous post neither Greg or
Mathias gave a feedback that this was not acceptable...

We can think about splitting but apart from firmware load there is not
much extra functionality that we need to add, the controller behaviour
as a standard xhci-pci. So i am not sure if we gain much by splitting.

> Also, It seems there hasn't been much feedback on this for a few
> months now. Is there a newer version of the patchset I should sync
> with? Do you have plans to resubmit soon?

Well am still waiting for feedback :( I dont have any update on top of
this, I can repost but I dont think that really serves a purpose.

I would really like to hear from Greg if this series is acceptable and
if not what would he like to see changed.

Thanks
-- 
~Vinod