On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 03:56:51PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > Quoting Peter Chen (2016-07-07 02:14:51) > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/chipidea/host.c b/drivers/usb/chipidea/host.c > > index 053bac9..55120ef 100644 > > --- a/drivers/usb/chipidea/host.c > > +++ b/drivers/usb/chipidea/host.c > > @@ -109,15 +109,25 @@ static int host_start(struct ci_hdrc *ci) > > struct ehci_hcd *ehci; > > struct ehci_ci_priv *priv; > > int ret; > > + struct device *dev = ci->dev; > > > > - if (usb_disabled()) > > + if (usb_disabled() || !dev) > > Does that ever happen? I don't think so, will delete it. > > > return -ENODEV; > > > > - hcd = usb_create_hcd(&ci_ehci_hc_driver, ci->dev, dev_name(ci->dev)); > > + /* > > + * USB Core will try to get child node under roothub, > > + * but chipidea core has no of_node, and the child node > > + * for controller is located at glue layer's node which > > + * is chipidea core's parent. > > + */ > > + if (dev->parent && dev->parent->of_node) > > + dev->of_node = dev->parent->of_node; > > Why not do this during the ci device probe? How is host special for > having an of_node for the child device. > Good idea. I did this when I added USB device DT support, but did not consider potential gadget/phy use cases. -- Best Regards, Peter Chen -- 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
