Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx> writes: > On Wed, Nov 05, 2014 at 08:46:58PM +0100, Robert Jarzmik wrote: > Well, let's add that :-) Just make it optional. It's pointless to have > 80% duplicated code just because of 20% missing in phy-generic :-) > > Then we avoid adding gpio-vbus specific DT properties too. OK, got it. It will take me a couple of days. Philipp, am I missing something apart the detection and connect stuff ? While I'm at making my board work with phy-generic, let's thing ahead. Felipe, that will mean at least this for phy-generic : - usb_phy_gen_create_phy() will be enhanced => struct usb_phy_generic_platform_data will get a : - int gpio_vbus field (or whatever name you wish) - int gpio_vbus_inverted (or maybe we could go directly for gpio desc) - int gpio_pullup field (I'm not sure here, maybe we should just drop that) - bool wakeup field (or another name) => device tree will get : - a vbus-gpio (or another name) - a pullup-gpio (or nothing if we drop) - there will be a request_irq() and a workqueue (mostly taken from gpio-vbus) => will call usb_gadget_vbus_connect() => will call usb_gadget_vbus_disconnect() I'm writing all this just to be sure I have the good picture before I start coding. Cheers. -- Robert -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html