30.12.2021 23:17, Matthias Kaehlcke пишет:
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 11:05:28PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> 16.11.2021 23:07, Matthias Kaehlcke пишет:
>>> +static const struct usb_device_id onboard_hub_id_table[] = {
>>> + { USB_DEVICE(VENDOR_ID_REALTEK, 0x0411) }, /* RTS0411 USB 3.0 */
>>> + { USB_DEVICE(VENDOR_ID_REALTEK, 0x5411) }, /* RTS5411 USB 2.0 */
>>> + {},
>>> +};
>>
>> RTS5411 two times in the comments?
>
> One time, the other is RTS0511
>
>> Internet suggests that RTS5411 is USB 3.0
>
> Correct, however the chip internally has two hubs, one for USB2 and one for
> USB3:
>
> Bus 002 Device 002: ID 0bda:0411 Realtek Semiconductor Corp. 4-Port USB 3.1 Hub
> Bus 001 Device 002: ID 0bda:5411 Realtek Semiconductor Corp. 4-Port USB 2.1 Hub
Alright, thanks.
>> Are these hubs expected to be powered-on only when upstream port is
>> enabled? Shouldn't runtime PM be used for that somehow?
>
> In the general case I would expect that a onboard hub is connected to a port
> that is enabled. For now I think it's fine to power the hub always when the
> system is running (which is also the current situation with using always-on
> regulators). If someone has an actual use case where the upstream port can
> be disabled they can add support for that later.
>
I see that you're handling the wakeup-capable devices during the
driver's suspend, perhaps it should work okay then.
BTW, shouldn't the "companion-hub" need to be turned into a generic USB
property? The onboard-usb-hub looks like a generic thing, but
"companion-hub" is specific to the RTS5411 binding.
