[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YAay83Ze47hNu5Ii@kroah.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 11:22:43 +0100
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Howard Yen <howardyen@...gle.com>
Cc: robh+dt@...nel.org, mathias.nyman@...el.com,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] dt-bindings: usb: usb-xhci: add USB offload support
On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 06:10:44PM +0800, Howard Yen wrote:
> Document USB offload support for usb-xhci.
>
> For example:
>
> &usbdrd_dwc3 {
> ...
> /* support usb offloading, 0: disabled, 1: audio */
> offload = <1>;
> ...
> };
>
> Signed-off-by: Howard Yen <howardyen@...gle.com>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-xhci.txt | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-xhci.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-xhci.txt
> index b120dd6612a2..aab1fd499f15 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-xhci.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-xhci.txt
> @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ Optional properties:
> - quirk-broken-port-ped: set if the controller has broken port disable mechanism
> - imod-interval-ns: default interrupt moderation interval is 5000ns
> - phys : see usb-hcd.yaml in the current directory
> + - offload: supporting USB offload feature, 0: disabled, 1: audio
Why does the "type" of offload matter, shouldn't it just be:
0: disabled, 1: enabled
?
And in thinking about it some more, why does this need to be a binding
at all, shouldn't this just be an issue if the platform-specific ops are
available or not, meaning no DT change should be needed at all?
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists