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>