Re: [PATCH 2/3] usb: ehci-ppc-of dts bindings.

David Gibson <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.usb.devel,gmane.linux.ports.ppc64.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Wed, Sep 19, 2007 at 06:50:02PM +0200, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> >>> +  Required properties:
> >>> +  - device_type : should be "usb".
> >> No device_type please.  The published USB binding doesn't define
> >> one on purpose.
> >
> > Could you please, explain why?
> > Sorry, I don't think I get the concept of device description here.
> 
> "device_type" is meant to be used only by OF for determining the OF
> programming model for a device.  No such thing has been defined for
> USB busses, so the USB binding does not define a "device_type" either.
> 
> Nothing in a flat device tree should ever define a device_type, except
> perhaps for compatibility with legacy kernel code.

This is not necessarily true.  As Segher says, device_type originally
indicated the OF programming model for a device.  However, we've
extended the notion for the flat device tree to allow device_type to
cover "device classes" which could have certain common properties and
semantics.  However, in this case, a meaningful class binding must
already be defined: it might make sense for usb to have a defined
device_type, but it's not been defined so far, so for now you must
omit device_type (if a device_type is defined in future, it's easier
to add legacy hooks that will include devices which are missing the
relevant device_type marker than to work around devices which *do*
have the marker, but pre-date and don't follow the defined class
binding).

> >>> +  - compatible : should be "ehci".
> >> Just "ehci" isn't enough -- compare to OHCI, which is the name for
> >> a kind of USB host controller as well as for a kind of Firewire
> >> host controller.
> >
> > Actually, I though device type="usb" + compatible="ehci" would be 
> > enough.
> 
> "compatible" values are their own namespace, you should in principle
> be able to find a driver for a device with them without having to look
> at other properties.

Yes.  Regardless of the state of any class / device_type binding, the
compatible property *alone* should be sufficient to select a driver.

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
[email protected]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.