On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 06:49:46PM GMT, Caleb Connolly wrote: > > > On 20/06/2024 17:07, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 03:30:29PM GMT, Caleb Connolly wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 20/06/2024 15:15, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > > > On Wed, 19 Jun 2024 at 23:33, Caleb Connolly <caleb.connolly@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Give a hint to the OS which role we prefer. Host mode generally makes > > > > > the most sense. > > > > > > > > Why? > > > > > > I guess this is subjective, but on these boards the more common usecase is > > > host mode (before we had role switching we forced them to host mode...). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Caleb Connolly <caleb.connolly@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > --- > > > > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/qrb4210-rb2.dts | 4 ++++ > > > > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+) > > > > > > > > Would it make sense to set this for all the RB and HDK boards? > > > > > > The rb1/2 are the only boards which lack multiple USB controllers. For > > > others it's fine to leave the default (peripheral mode). > > > > SM8450-HDK and SM8650-HDK also have just a single USB-C port. My logic > > was slightly different. We consider these devices to be SBCs, so I'd > > expect that they act as hosts _by_default_. If somebody plugs RB board > > into a laptop, then it's logical that it should work as a device, but > > between the phone and the RB board the RB is a host. > > Ahh I see, then yes perhaps it makes sense. I can send v2 with patches for > other boards too. > > * qrb2210-rb1 > * qrb4210-rb2 > * sm8450-hdk > * sm8650-hdk > > Any others? qcs6490-rb3gen2 please. I'm picking patch 1 for v6.10, no need to repost it. Regards, Bjorn > > > > -- > // Caleb (they/them)
