Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 12:38:39 +0200 From: Hans Petter Selasky <hselasky@c2i.net> To: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Is there a reason that xhci isn't mentioned in NOTES in 8-stable? Message-ID: <201207191238.39747.hselasky@c2i.net> In-Reply-To: <5007E2BA.3010300@FreeBSD.org> References: <5007D002.7000805@FreeBSD.org> <201207191229.52222.hselasky@c2i.net> <5007E2BA.3010300@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thursday 19 July 2012 12:34:34 Doug Barton wrote: > On 07/19/2012 03:29, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > > On Thursday 19 July 2012 11:38:11 Doug Barton wrote: > >> On 07/19/2012 02:17, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: > >>> On Thursday 19 July 2012 11:14:42 Doug Barton wrote: > >>>> The xhci code in 8-stable works, but it's not mentioned in the NOTES > >>>> files in sys/conf, sys/i386/conf, or sys/amd64/conf. The module is > >>>> hooked up in sys/modules/usb/Makefile, and that's how I've been using > >>>> it so far. Is it not possible to compile this code into the kernel? > >>>> > >>>> Doug > >>> > >>> Yes, you can compile xhci into the kernel using "device xhci". Not sure > >>> who's responsible for updating NOTES. > >> > >> That would be you. :) (Since AFAICS you added the code.) It should > >> almost certainly also be in the GENERIC files for the systems to which > >> it applies. > >> > >> In HEAD and stable/9 it's in sys/conf/NOTES, and > >> {amd64|i386}/conf/GENERIC; so the same should probably go for stable/8. > >> Not sure if the code works on stable/7 or not, but we're going to do > >> another release in stable/8 so it should be updated there for sure. > > > > I've MFC'ed the NOTES bit, but I'm not sure about the GENERIC bit. > > > > http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/238616 > > Thanks! What are your concerns about adding it to GENERIC? Hi, I don't see any problems at the present. I think all issues have been ironed out including the 32/64 byte context sizes. From what I'm aware the XHCI driver in 8-stable should be the same like in 9- and 10- except from a recent patch done by mav @. This patch should not make a big difference, except for INTEL patherpoint devices. --HPS
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201207191238.39747.hselasky>