On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 04:28:18PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 03:15:11PM +0000, Måns Rullgård wrote: > > Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > > On Mon, Jan 27, 2020 at 04:56:15PM +0000, Måns Rullgård wrote: > > >> Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > >> > > >> > On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 03:25:03PM +0000, Mans Rullgard wrote: > > >> >> Add a non-removable-ports property that lists the hardwired downstream > > >> >> ports of a hub. Although hubs can provide this information, they are > > >> >> not always configured correctly. An alternate means of indicating this > > >> >> for built-in USB devices is thus useful. > > >> >> > > >> >> Signed-off-by: Mans Rullgard <mans@xxxxxxxxx> > > >> > > > >> > I reviewed this already, but since you didn't add my reviewed-by, I'm > > >> > looking at it again and having 2nd thoughts. > > >> > > > >> >> --- > > >> >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-device.txt | 4 ++++ > > >> >> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > >> >> > > >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-device.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-device.txt > > >> >> index 036be172b1ae..92d863cc96b6 100644 > > >> >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-device.txt > > >> >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/usb-device.txt > > >> >> @@ -66,6 +66,10 @@ Required properties for host-controller nodes with device nodes: > > >> >> - #size-cells: shall be 0 > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> +Optional properties for hub and host-controller nodes: > > >> >> +- non-removable-ports: list of hardwired downstream ports > > >> > > > >> > If you have a hardwired device and need to know that, doesn't that imply > > >> > there's some other stuff you need to describe beyond what a standard USB > > >> > device has. Such as a power supply that's not Vbus from the hub. > > >> > > >> I suppose there could be, but there isn't in my actual situation. > > >> > > >> > At a minimum, I think this should be a per port property. > > >> > > >> That's what I suggested first. Greg told me to do it like this instead. > > > > > > I said that? I do not remember discussing this at all, when did that > > > happen? > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190228155241.GC12050@xxxxxxxxx/ > > Almost a full year ago! Hah, I can't remember what I wrote last week. Ah, ok, all I said was "do what ACPI does here", as that's a model of what has already been agreed apon by a whole huge number of people and standardized. No need for DT to come up with something totally different instead, making a mess of things :) If this is doing what ACPI does, fine, if not, it should. It was here first. thanks, greg k-h
