[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090306155527.GA24448@elte.hu>
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 16:55:27 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc: Daniel Walker <dwalker@...o99.com>,
Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>, mingo@...hat.com,
hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, gregkh@...e.de, tglx@...utronix.de,
sarah.a.sharp@...el.com, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/doc] x86/doc: mini-howto for using earlyprintk=dbgp
* Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Mar 2009, Daniel Walker wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2009-03-05 at 15:59 -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote:
> >
> > > > - a.) Host/target system needs to have USB debug port capability.
> > > > + a.) You will need two USB ports. One on the client/console system and one on
> > > > + the target system.
> > > > +
> > > > + b.) The client/console and target USB ports must have the debug port
> > > > + capability.
> > >
> > > Is that correct on the (ugh, I think that the naming/terminology is
> > > still mucked up, but you didn't do that) host/target system?
> > >
> > > On the client/console (which I would call the host and I would call the
> > > "Host/target" here just the Target system), a USB debug port is needed,
> > > but on the Host/target, it should just look like a USB device.
> > > At least that was the intent AFAIK/IIRC. No?
> > >
> >
> > >From the rest of document I assumed Host/target was referring to both
> > sides of the connection. So you would need USB on both sides for this
> > thing to work. I assumed Client/console was just the host. I guess that
> > is all kind of confusing tho ..
>
> The term "Host" is too confusing to be used here; it has too
> many other meanings. "Target" is good.
I used Host/Target for that reason, consistently so. The combo
gives us the best of both worlds.
> "Client" is probably okay too, but I don't like "Console" so
> much because both machines will have a console. "Debugging
> console" is more accurate but also more cumbersome.
I used client/console term for that reason.
> > The document indicates you need this one capability on your
> > USB port in addition to the USB device (check the complete
> > document for how to find the capability). So both host and
> > target need this one capability, and then you also need the
> > USB device for the whole thing to work.
>
> In fact the original document was rather clear about this; it
> says only that the target machine needs the debug capability.
> The client machine uses its normal USB driver and treats the
> debugging cable as a normal USB serial device.
yes.
btw., i think this document is being over-engineered.
Significantly so.
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists