viric has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
viric_ has joined #qi-hardware
viric_ is now known as viric
viric has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
xiangfu has joined #qi-hardware
panda|w530 has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
viric has joined #qi-hardware
viric has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
viric has joined #qi-hardware
jekhor has joined #qi-hardware
viric has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
viric has joined #qi-hardware
xiangfu has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<apelete>
Good morning everyone
viric has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
valhalla has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
viric has joined #qi-hardware
valhalla has joined #qi-hardware
<larsc>
morning
wolfspraul has joined #qi-hardware
<apelete>
larsc: thinking about submitting the fix for hnp upstream, so that review can start asap
<apelete>
do you think that's a good idea or not ?
<larsc>
probably a good idea
<apelete>
larsc: any advice on how to proceed ?
<larsc>
git format-patch; git send-email ;)
<apelete>
larsc: nice, thanks :-)
<apelete>
will let you know before doing it, probably tonight after work
<apelete>
larsc: what kernel version and tree should the fix be rebased on ?
<apelete>
latest 3.13-rcX ? linus' tree or someone else's (felipe balbi maybe) ?
<larsc>
the later
<larsc>
check the MAINTAINERS file
<larsc>
there is probably a git tree for USB
<apelete>
yeah, felipe is the maintainer for musb, and he's got a tree for usb
<apelete>
larsc: will mirror his tree and rebase the fix on it, thanks
jekhor has quit [Ping timeout: 248 seconds]
panda|w530 has joined #qi-hardware
wej has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
wej has joined #qi-hardware
pcercuei has joined #qi-hardware
<DocScrutinizer05>
what's the problem with HNP?
<DocScrutinizer05>
(not that in real life HNP is *ever* used. But I seen it working when we experimented with H-E-N prototypes)
<DocScrutinizer05>
larsc: ^^^
<larsc>
that the board doesn't have HNP support
<larsc>
but the linux kernel assumes it has
<DocScrutinizer05>
oh well
<DocScrutinizer05>
aaah
<DocScrutinizer05>
ok
<larsc>
easy to fix
<DocScrutinizer05>
makes sense to kick it out then
<DocScrutinizer05>
nobody needs HNP
lekernel has joined #qi-hardware
<DocScrutinizer05>
at least I hope no silly printer is using HNP to switch the camera from USB-A to mass-storage to download the pictures to print
<DocScrutinizer05>
it's a brainfart concept
<DocScrutinizer05>
you'll need it when you want a USB-OTG stamp from USBcert
<DocScrutinizer05>
but OTG is overengineered anyway
<wpwrak>
HNP is what happens when you let the intern design your OTG:
<wpwrak>
the intern thinks about it for a moment, realizes that host/device role could be communicated simply through the ID pin, and drafts that up. hands the draft to the experts on the same day.
<DocScrutinizer05>
HNP is about overriding the ID assignment
<wpwrak>
they look at it and are HORRIFIED. where's all the complexity ? what is there to make their jobs look important ? what to make the certificate a difficult and therefore worthwhile goal ?
<wpwrak>
then they go in to design HNP. and the world is whole again :)
<wpwrak>
s/in/on/
<qi-bot>
wpwrak meant: "then they go on to design HNP. and the world is whole agaon :)"
<DocScrutinizer05>
HNP is defined as swapping A/B roles as defined by ID pin
<wpwrak>
yes, i know :)
<wpwrak>
at least that's what it says
<DocScrutinizer05>
without ID there's no HNP really
<DocScrutinizer05>
when you use a USB hardware that doesn't care about ID then it's not OTG and thus doesn't need to bother about HNP
<wpwrak>
it's true purpose is to add the complexity that was forgotten in that silly ID pin concept. you have to uphold the brand reputation, don't you ? USB - certified complexity
<wpwrak>
s/it's/its/ # damn
<qi-bot>
wpwrak meant: "its true purpose is to add the complexity that was forgotten in that silly ID pin concept. you have to uphold the brand reputation, don't you ? USB - certified complexity"
jekhor has joined #qi-hardware
larsc_ has joined #qi-hardware
rodgort` has joined #qi-hardware
rodgort has quit [*.net *.split]
larsc has quit [*.net *.split]
wej has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
wej has joined #qi-hardware
larsc_ is now known as larsc
FDCX has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
FDCX has joined #qi-hardware
rz2k has joined #qi-hardware
kilae has joined #qi-hardware
rz2k has quit []
kilae_ has joined #qi-hardware
kilae has quit [Ping timeout: 265 seconds]
ysionnea1 is now known as ysionneau
dos1 has joined #qi-hardware
xiangfu has joined #qi-hardware
rz2k has joined #qi-hardware
_whitelogger has joined #qi-hardware
wolfspraul has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
wolfspraul has joined #qi-hardware
viric has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
viric has joined #qi-hardware
xiangfu has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
panda|w530 has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
<apelete>
larsc: hi
<larsc>
hi
<apelete>
larsc: I just rebased the hnp patch on top of felipe balbi's master branch
<apelete>
been wondering, how to test it since there is no qi_lb60_defconfig file upstream ?
<apelete>
what config file should I use to do a test build before submitting ?
<larsc>
I think you can just copy the qi_lb60_defconfig
<apelete>
ok, that's what I did actually, and it builds, but how is the kernel community going to test it ?
<larsc>
they'll have to trust you
<larsc>
You can test the patch without the hardware anyway
<apelete>
ok, fine :-)
<larsc>
s/can/can't/
<qi-bot>
larsc meant: "You can't test the patch without the hardware anyway"
<larsc>
that makes more sense
<apelete>
I will try it on the nanonote on my side before submitting it
<apelete>
yeah, just thought about asking you before doing something stupid ;-)
apelete has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
apelete has joined #qi-hardware
mth has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
mth has joined #qi-hardware
<wpwrak>
s/it's/its/ # damn
<wpwrak>
oops
kilae_ has quit [Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.90.1 [Firefox 25.0.1/20131112160018]]