On Fri, Mar 08, 2013 at 09:26:24AM +0200, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > > Differ with dwc3, chipidea created its platform data at glue layer, > > and chipidea core owing this data when platform device is created. > > yeah yeah, but that's just because chipidea core doesn't understand DT. > > It should take you no more than a day to teach it about DT, though. Not > sure what you're complaining about. I have not complained about it, it is out of scope of this patchset. This patchset is just adds ID/vbus support for chipidea. For other enhancements, it needs another patchset. > > > If we also want get things from DT node, we need to get node from > > glue layer as this node is NOT belonged to chipidea core's pdev. > > which DT node are you talking about ? you want chipidea core to have > access to glue's DT node ? Are you insane ? Please read chipidea code, the chipidea core (pdev & platform data) is not created by DT, it is created by glue layer. If we added dts entry like you showed me, we can't get node by pdev->dev.of_node. > > If you wanna add DT support for chipidea core, you need to come up with > a compatible that makes sense. It won't be fsl,* because chipidea core > doesn't belong to fsl. I know it. > > > Convert platform data to DT for chipidea core is a big job, > > no it's not. I need to change all msm and pci board related files. > > yeah, but this patch makes no sense. The right thing (TM) to do is, as I > have said multiple times before, to teach chipidea core about DT. Please > stop trying to find excuses for not doing the work you need to do; You > would've already done it if you had spent so much of everybody's time > trying to find excuses why not to do it and why Alex should accept your > broken patches. First let chipidea core know about DT is out of this patchset. Second, why you think it is a broken patch, it just follows current framework. Besides, if you have concerns about DT stuff for chipidea core, why not mention it when sasche added dr_mode and phy_mode at that time? > > Have you already forgotten how many issues were found in each and every > version of your patchset ? There's a reason why we're revieweing v11, > right ? I just want to limit this patchset to id/vbus enable feature, I admit I am less upstream experience, but if new requirements new features and new bugs always coming, things can't be ended up easily. -- 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
