[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACxGe6sM8_d_omiQU=4qA207dnYMGDELN0KDbhYDsWDg7RKAKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2013 23:08:37 +0100
From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@...rix.com>,
Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
devicetree@...nel.org, Linux USB list <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Non-enumerable devices on USB and other enumerable buses
On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> I know there's been some discussion of this topic but do we have any
> general consensus on how to handle such things both from a Linux driver
> model point of view and from a DT/ACPI point of view?
There is precedence for describing enumerated device in the device
tree. Real OpenFirmware platforms can and will enumerate the PCI and
USB busses and pass a full tree to the OS. I don't think we want to
full enumerating like that with either ACPI or FDT, but we could allow
for sparse population of devices when something is fixed like a
soldered down USB hub or USB Ethernet MAC.
To make it work would probably require a hook in the USB enumeration
path to look for matching nodes in DT/ACPI and attach it to the struct
device.
g.
--
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