From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp124.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com (smtp124.sbc.mail.sp1.yahoo.com [69.147.64.97]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8397FDE031 for ; Thu, 25 Sep 2008 06:47:59 +1000 (EST) From: David Brownell To: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: add Freescale QE/CPM USB peripheral controller driver Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2008 13:15:26 -0700 References: <200808290027.59127.arnd@arndb.de> In-Reply-To: <200808290027.59127.arnd@arndb.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-Id: <200809241315.26794.david-b@pacbell.net> Cc: greg@kroah.com, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, Alan Stern , Scott Wood , Li Yang List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Thursday 28 August 2008, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > If the gadget hardware drivers were registering the device with a > gadget_bus_type, you could still enforce the "only one protocol" > rule by binding every protocol to every device in that bus type. And you'd have to rewrite all the gadget drivers ("protocol") to work with multiple upstream ports. That gets messy with e.g. the Ethernet links ... each would need to be configured with unique ethernet address pairs. Likewise with serial numbers. I've learned to just accept complaints in this area as sort of a price for existing. It's all complaints, no patches. So obviously the complaints don't have any requirements backing them. ;)