Re: [PATCH 1/3] arm: shmobile: lager: Add USBHS support

[Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>]

On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 07:26:53PM +0900, Magnus Damm wrote:
> Hi Valentine,
> 
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2014 at 8:05 AM, Valentine
> <valentine.barshak@cogentembedded.com> wrote:
> > On 01/24/2014 08:40 AM, Magnus Damm wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Valentine,
> >>
> >
> > Hi Magnus,
> >
> >
> >> On Sat, Jan 18, 2014 at 3:31 AM, Valentine
> >> <valentine.barshak@cogentembedded.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 01/15/2014 04:39 PM, Magnus Damm wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 11:13 PM, Valentine Barshak
> >>>> <valentine.barshak@cogentembedded.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> This adds USBHS PHY and registers USBHS device if the driver is
> >>>>> enabled.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Valentine Barshak <valentine.barshak@cogentembedded.com>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>>    arch/arm/mach-shmobile/board-lager.c | 117
> >>>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>>    1 file changed, 117 insertions(+)
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Valentine,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Magnus, Simon,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks for this USB function patch. I'd like to switch focus to USB
> >>>> function soon.
> >>>>
> >>>> By the way, I'm happy to see that SATA platform device support is
> >>>> picked up by Simon. I intend to give your SATA DTS patches a go later
> >>>> this week, they should be ready to queue up rather soon I believe.
> >>>>
> >>>> Would it be possible for you to update your USB function platform
> >>>> device patches for Lager and Koelsch? I'd like to merge those after
> >>>> SATA, and the platform device files shouldn't change now so USB can go
> >>>> next now unless I'm mistaken. Please send a complete per-board series
> >>>> for USB function so patch pick up and testing gets easy - same style
> >>>> as SATA would be great.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Just respinned the USB series for Lager and Koelsch.
> >>> I did not include defconfig changes yet.
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks!
> >>
> >>> I think we need to enable kernel modules in the defconfig first,
> >>> so that multiple USB gadgets can be selected as modules.
> >>
> >>
> >> I agree that for testing something is needed., but perhaps a simple
> >> composite device is enough?
> >>
> >> In general I think the USB gadget kernel configuration is something
> >> that it is left for the distributions to select since it depends on
> >> each use case. Also, using modules is fine but I also think there is
> >> some configfs interface that can be used to configure the USB gadget
> >> during run time.
> >
> >
> > I've sent a couple of patches that enable modules for lager and koelsch.
> > I think this is useful even if we decide to go with composite gadget.
> 
> Ok, thanks, I will duck and let Simon decide about this!

I think it would be better to wait until we need modules
before turning them on.