From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Chen Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/1] USB: core: let USB device know device node Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 15:44:20 +0800 Message-ID: <20160118074420.GE8150@shlinux2> References: <22377526.4ksCBpoDgG@wuerfel> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-usb-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Alan Stern Cc: Arnd Bergmann , Peter Chen , gregkh-hQyY1W1yCW8ekmWlsbkhG0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, kernel-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org, devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, robh+dt-DgEjT+Ai2ygdnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org, pawel.moll-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org, mark.rutland-5wv7dgnIgG8@public.gmane.org, linux-usb-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, balbi-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org, valentin.longchamp-SkAbAL50j+5BDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org, s.hauer-bIcnvbaLZ9MEGnE8C9+IrQ@public.gmane.org, stillcompiling-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 15, 2016 at 10:11:06AM -0500, 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)? > I don't think we need to have such node, even root hub needs something from device tree, it can get them from controller's node. -- Best Regards, Peter Chen -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html