On Mon, 19 May 2014, Felipe Balbi wrote: > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 05:40:29PM +0200, Andrzej Pietrasiewicz wrote: > > Hi Peter, > > > > W dniu 16.05.2014 11:00, Peter Chen pisze: > > >Hi Felipe & Alan, > > > > > >To continue with topic discussed at > > >http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg105279.html, > > >I implement the gadget bus to bind udc to gadget driver follow > > >most ideas from your two. > > > > > > > While the idea is interesting I think some aspects of the implementation > > must be thought over. > > definitely. For example we don't want automatic binding, basically we > might want to have g_mass_storage running on both ports and this series > would prevent it. Peter's suggestion was just for default bindings. If the default gives you something you don't like, you can always change the bindings through sysfs. > I feel this won't be ready until 3.18 or so. What Peter wants is relatively simple: When a gadget driver registers with the composite core, if there is an unbound UDC, bind the two of them. When a UDC is registered with the composite core, if there is a gadget driver with no bindings, bind the two of them. I think that will be sufficient. Shouldn't it be possible to accomplish this without interfering with the configfs mechanism? And without going so far as to add an entire gadget bus? Alan Stern -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
