MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20130811190826.GH6427@sirena.org.uk>
References: <20130811190826.GH6427@sirena.org.uk>
From: Grant Likely <grant.likely@linaro.org>
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2013 23:08:37 +0100
Message-ID: <CACxGe6sM8_d_omiQU=4qA207dnYMGDELN0KDbhYDsWDg7RKAKQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Non-enumerable devices on USB and other enumerable buses
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Rob Herring <rob.herring@calxeda.com>, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
        Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>,
        Ian Campbell <ian.campbell@citrix.com>, Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, devicetree@kernel.org,
        Linux USB list <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1054
Lines: 22

On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 8:08 PM, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> wrote:
> I know there's been some discussion of this topic but do we have any
> general consensus on how to handle such things both from a Linux driver
> model point of view and from a DT/ACPI point of view?

There is precedence for describing enumerated device in the device
tree. Real OpenFirmware platforms can and will enumerate the PCI and
USB busses and pass a full tree to the OS. I don't think we want to
full enumerating like that with either ACPI or FDT, but we could allow
for sparse population of devices when something is fixed like a
soldered down USB hub or USB Ethernet MAC.

To make it work would probably require a hook in the USB enumeration
path to look for matching nodes in DT/ACPI and attach it to the struct
device.

g.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/