[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <746b08aabf7ea976a382ad2ca30fa10a095e7ed8.camel@kernel.crashing.org>
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 09:50:42 +0100
From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
To: Tao Ren <rentao.bupt@...il.com>
Cc: Joel Stanley <joel@....id.au>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>,
linux-aspeed <linux-aspeed@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Jeffery <andrew@...id.au>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
OpenBMC Maillist <openbmc@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Chunfeng Yun <chunfeng.yun@...iatek.com>,
Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>,
Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] usb: gadget: aspeed: read vhub config from
of_device_id
On Mon, 2020-02-10 at 11:07 -0800, Tao Ren wrote:
> > > This looks generally okay. We should wait for Ben's ack before
> > > applying.
> >
> > Shouldn't we instead have DT fields indicating those values ?
>
> May I ask why we prefer adding dt fields (such as "aspeed,vhub-max-ports"
> and "aspeed,vhub-max-endpoints") instead of assigning these values based
> on aspeed family? For example, is it to allow users to set a smaller
> number of ports/endpoints?
It's not a strong drive but it makes it more convenient to add support
to newer revisions if the only differences are those numbers.
>
> > Also we should add a DT representation for the various ID/strings of
> > the hub itself so manufacturers can customize them.
>
> Sure. I will add DT nodes for vendor/product/device IDs/strings. As it's
> not directly related to ast2600-support, shall I handle it in a separate
> patch? Or I can include the patch in this patch series?
Separate. Thanks !
Cheers,
Ben.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists