Hello Felipe, On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 3:56 PM Felipe Balbi wrote: <snip> > On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:43:11AM +0200, Andrzej Pietrasiewicz wrote: > > Demonstrate a USB gadget configured entirely through configfs. > > This is a work in progress. > > <snip> > > this is wrong. we don't want *another* gadget driver. We want to get rid > of the ones we have. The end goal is to keep only f_* files in kernel. > I definitely agree about f_* files. However, I think we need... something? While Sebastian's recent patch series shows how to remove #include .c lines from gadget code, it does not do anything about the gadgets in the meaning that if we had e.g. g_zero module before, we _still_ have the g_zero, _plus_ we have f_sourcesink and f_loopback modules. In other words, one must still insmod g_zero (f_sourcesink and f_loopback being automatically requested), possibly setting some parameters like vendor id, product id and so on. The g_zero here contains a usb_composite_driver which, after it gets probed, takes one udc. I think what we want here is a possibility to configure multiple functions in one gadget (under one udc, in other words). So the "something" I mentioned earlier should be the place where the usb_composite_driver is defined and probed. And I called this kind of entity a "gadget". Any better name? Does this sound reasonable to you? Or do you think about something completely different? Thanks, AP -- 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
