Daniel
> On 08.04.2013 12:39, B, Ravi wrote:
> >> Subject: [PATCH v2 09/11] usb: musb: re-introduce musb->port_mode
> >>
> >> Define MUSB_PORT_MODE_{HOST,GADGET,DUAL_ROLE} and store the
> >> platform-specified value in struct musb.
> >>
> >> Note that MUSB_PORT_MODE_HOST has to be set to 1 in order to match
> >> existing device tree bindings which are already documented but in fact
> >> unusued.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Mack <zonque@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c | 1 +
> >> drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.h | 7 +++++++
> >> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c
> b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c
> >> index fbcf5cb..2640d25 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_core.c
> >> @@ -1821,6 +1821,7 @@ musb_init_controller(struct device *dev, int nIrq,
> >> void __iomem *ctrl)
> >> musb->board_set_power = plat->set_power;
> >> musb->min_power = plat->min_power;
> >> musb->ops = plat->platform_ops;
> >> + musb->port_mode = plat->mode;
> >
> > I assume plat->mode is fetched from DT.
>
> Yes, that's already done in the current mainline. The problem is that
> this value is not used anywhere, though.
>
> > You may need to over-ride mode field from DT for host-only or gadget-
> only configuration through menuconfig.
>
> As stated in the other mail, I don't think this is a good idea at all.
> The config chooses which parts of the kernel you want to build in, the
> runtime config lets you select the actual mode. Mixing them up just
> makes it much harder for people to understand what's going on.
>
My concern is , what if user selects HOST only mode thru menu config and provide DT port-mode bindings wrongly.
--
Ravi B
--
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
