From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: arnd@arndb.de (Arnd Bergmann) Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2016 00:03:37 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v3 1/1] USB: core: let USB device know device node In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5216704.YbueADHOOR@wuerfel> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Friday 15 January 2016 10:11:06 Alan Stern wrote: > On Fri, 15 Jan 2016, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > > On Friday 15 January 2016 17:17:27 Peter Chen wrote: > > > Although most of USB devices are hot-plug's, there are still some devices > > > are hard wired on the board, eg, for HSIC and SSIC interface USB devices. > > > If these kinds of USB devices are multiple functions, and they can supply > > > other interfaces like i2c, gpios for other devices, we may need to > > > describe these at device tree. > > > > > > In this commit, it uses "reg" in dts as port number to match the port > > > number decided by USB core, if they are the same, then the device node > > > is for the device we are creating for USB core. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Peter Chen > > > > Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann > > > > > > Just one last question: > > > > > dev->active_duration = -jiffies; > > > #endif > > > - if (root_hub) /* Root hub always ok [and always wired] */ > > > + if (root_hub) { /* Root hub always ok [and always wired] */ > > > dev->authorized = 1; > > > - else { > > > + dev->of_node = bus->controller->of_node; > > > > > > You are adding the of_node of the controller to the root hub, which I > > guess means that we now have two 'struct device' instances with the > > same of_node. They have different bus_types, so I think that is ok, > > but I wonder if it would be better to leave out the of_node for the > > root hub to avoid the confusion. Can you think of a case where we > > actually want to add properties for the root hub that we can't do > > more easily in the host controller? > > There may not be any such cases, but there's still a good reason for > setting the root hub's of_node pointer: to initialize the recursion > along the USB device tree. > > This leaves the question of whether OF will always use the same node to > represent the host controller and the root hub. In other words, if a > motherboard has a fixed device plugged into a fixed root-hub port, will > the DT description make that device a child of the host controller? > Or will there be a node in between (to represent the root hub)? Good question. I'm sure the answer is somewhere in this document http://www.firmware.org/1275/bindings/usb/usb-1_0.ps but unfortunately I don't understand USB addressing well enough to answer this. I think the key sentence is the definition of the "reg" property: | prop-encoded-array: one integer, encoded as with encode-int. | The "reg" property for a device node shall consist of the number of the | USB hub port or the USB host controller port to which this USB device | is attached. As specified in [2] section 11.11.2.1, port numbers range | from 1 to 255. Does the root hub have a port number relative to the host controller, or is it identical to the host controller from the addressing perspective? Arnd