Re: [PATCH 3/7] usb: dwc3: pci: Store device properties dynamically

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 11:12 PM, Thinh Nguyen
<Thinh.Nguyen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 2/17/2018 7:29 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 11:55 PM, Thinh Nguyen
>> <Thinh.Nguyen@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Add the ability to add device properties dynamically. Currently, device
>>> properties are added to platform device using
>>> platform_device_add_properties(). However, this function does not allow
>>> adding properties incrementally. It is useful to have this ability when
>>> the driver needs to set common device properties across different HW
>>
>> I'm not sure it's useful anyhow.
>>
>>> or
>>> if IP and FPGA validation test different configurations for different
>>> HW.
>>
>> Shouldn't be a separate stuff for FPGA exclusively?
>
> Can you clarify/expand your question?

FPGA is the one which might have different properties at run time for
the same device.
So, why do we care on driver / generic level of it?

Shouldn't be FPGA manager take care of it (via DT overlays, for example)?

>>> To address this issue, update dwc3_pci to store device properties to
>>> an array and dynamically manage them here.
>>>
>>> Introduce two new functions to do so:
>>>   * dwc3_pci_add_one_property() - this function adds one property to
>>>     dwc->properties array and increase its size as needed
>>>   * dwc3_pci_add_properties() - this function takes a null terminated
>>>     array of device properties and add them to dwc->properties
>>
>> So, why you can't use ACPI / DT here?
>>
>
> dwc3_pci_add_properties() is a convenient function that takes statically
> allocated array of (quirks) properties for different HW and store them
> to dwc->properties. The idea is to add more properties on top of these
> required quirks.

Yes, I understand that. What's wrong with DT? The built-in device
properties have the same nature as usual properties for DT.
Whenever driver calls device_property_read_uXX() or alike it would
check all property provides for asked one.

Other than that, quirks esp. for FPGA sounds so wrong. Why in the
first place not to make non-broken hardware?!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Media]     [Linux Input]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [Old Linux USB Devel Archive]

  Powered by Linux