Re: usb: musb: Scheduling of interrupt endpoints

[Carsten Behling]

The following comment can be found in 'musb_schedule()':

'* REVISIT what we really want here is a regular schedule tree
 * like e.g. OHCI uses.'

So I assume the best practice would be to make an implementation based
on the code in in ohci-q.c. And it would be waste of time to port the old
interrupt endpoint scheduling feature of TI.

Am I right?

On 12/23/2014 08:59 AM, Carsten Behling wrote:
> Would it help if I send a patch as a suggestion and as basis for 
> discussion?
>
> On 12/19/2014 01:38 PM, Carsten Behling wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Long time ago, TI shipped a kernel named 
> > linux-2.6.32.17-psp03.01.01.39 with an additional kernel option
> > for scheduling of interrupt endpoints.
> >
> > AFAIK, this seems to be the only possibility to attach more that 4 in 
> > endpoints to MUSB (at least on a DM368).
> >
> > This feature reserves one hardware endpoint unit to time schedule 
> > interrupt in endpoints based
> > on its bInterval value triggered by the SOF interrupt.
> >
> > I didn't find any discussion about adding such a feature to the 
> > mainline kernel.
> > IMHO, this feature is absolutely necessary. But there may be reasons, 
> > not to add it (e.g. CPU load).
> >
> > Please let me know your thoughts and ideas.
> >
> > Best regards
> > -Carsten

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/