Hi, Peter Chen writes: > On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 04:40:53PM +0200, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >> On 13 July 2016 at 15:50, Felipe Balbi wrote: >> > Rafał Miłecki writes: >> >> On 13 July 2016 at 15:20, Felipe Balbi wrote: >> >>> Rafał Miłecki writes: >> >>>> Hi again, >> >>>> >> >>>> This is my second try of getting HCD providers into usb subsystem. >> >>>> >> >>>> During discussion of V1 I realized there are about 26 drivers adding a >> >>>> single HCD and all of them would need to be modified. So instead I >> >>>> decided to put relevant code in usb_add_hcd. It checks if the HCD we >> >>>> register is a primary one and if so, it registers a proper provider. >> >>>> >> >>>> Please note that of_hcd_xlate_simple was also extended to allow getting >> >>>> shared HCD (which is used e.g. in case of XHCI). >> >>>> >> >>>> So now you can have something like: >> >>>> >> >>>> ohci: ohci@21000 { >> >>>> #usb-cells = <0>; >> >>>> compatible = "generic-ohci"; >> >>>> reg = <0x00001000 0x1000>; >> >>>> interrupts = ; >> >>>> }; >> >>>> >> >>>> ehci: ehci@22000 { >> >>>> #usb-cells = <0>; >> >>>> compatible = "generic-ehci"; >> >>>> reg = <0x00002000 0x1000>; >> >>>> interrupts = ; >> >>>> }; >> >>>> >> >>>> xhci: xhci@23000 { >> >>>> #usb-cells = <1>; >> >>>> compatible = "generic-xhci"; >> >>>> reg = <0x00003000 0x1000>; >> >>>> interrupts = ; >> >>>> }; >> >>>> >> >>>> The last (second) patch is not supposed to be applied, it's used only as >> >>>> a proof and example of how providers can be used. >> >>> >> >>> nowhere here (or in previous patch) you clarify why exactly you need >> >>> this. What is your LED trigger supposed to do? Why can't it handle ports >> >>> changing number in different boots? Why do we need this at all? Why is >> >>> your code DT-specific? >> >>> >> >>> There are still too many 'unknowns' here. >> >> >> >> Are you sure you saw my reply to Peter's question? >> >> >> >> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-usb/msg143708.html >> >> http://marc.info/?l=linux-usb&m=146838735627093&w=2 >> >> >> >> I think it should answer (some of?) your questions. Can you read it >> >> and see if it gets a bit clearer? >> > >> > well, all that says is that you're writing a LED trigger to toggle LED >> > when a USB device gets added to a specified port. I don't think you need >> > the actual port number for that. You should have a phandle to the actual >> > port, whatever its number is, or a phandle to the (root-)Hub and a port >> > number from that hub. >> > >> > The problem, really, is that DT descriptor of USB Hosts is very, very >> > minimal. Perhaps there's something more extensively defined from the >> > original Open Firmware USB Addendum. >> >> Thanks for your effort and looking at this closely. You're right, I'm >> interested in referencing USB ports, but I'm using controller phandle >> (and then I specify ports manually). >> >> Having each port described by DT would be helpful, it's just something >> I didn't find implemented, so I started looking for different ways. It >> seems I should have picked a different solution. >> >> So should I work on describing USB ports in DT instead? This looks >> like a complex thing to describe, so I'd like to ask for some guidance >> first. What do you think about following schema/example? >> >> ohci@1000 { >> compatible = "generic-ohci"; >> reg = <0x00001000 0x1000>; >> interrupts = ; >> >> primary-hcd { >> ohci_port0: port@0 { >> reg = <0>; >> }; >> >> ohci_port1: port@1 { >> reg = <1>; >> }; >> } >> }; >> >> ehci@2000 { >> compatible = "generic-ehci"; >> reg = <0x00002000 0x1000>; >> interrupts = ; >> >> primary-hcd { >> ehci_port0: port@0 { >> reg = <0>; >> }; >> >> ehci_port1: port@1 { >> reg = <1>; >> }; >> } >> }; >> >> xhci@3000 { >> compatible = "generic-xhci"; >> reg = <0x00003000 0x1000>; >> interrupts = ; >> >> primary-hcd { >> }; >> >> shared-hcd { >> xhci_port0: port@0 { >> reg = <0>; >> }; >> } >> }; >> >> With such a DT struct, how could I query port for a Linux-assigned number? >> >> For example with OHCI, EHCI and XHCI drivers compiled, Linux assigns >> number 4 to my XHCI's shared HCD's root hub: >> xhci-hcd 18023000.xhci: xHCI Host Controller >> xhci-hcd 18023000.xhci: new USB bus registered, assigned bus number 4 >> hub 4-0:1.0: USB hub found >> hub 4-0:1.0: 1 port detected >> >> If I disable OHCI and EHCI I get: >> xhci-hcd xhci-hcd.0: xHCI Host Controller >> xhci-hcd xhci-hcd.0: new USB bus registered, assigned bus number 2 >> hub 2-0:1.0: USB hub found >> hub 2-0:1.0: 1 port detected >> >> So I need my "usbport" trigger driver to be able to get "4-1" in the >> first case and "2-1" in the second case. I guess I should use >> &xhci_port0 but what then? How could I translate it into >> Linux-assigned numbering? >> > > For your current design, you need to fix shared hcd for xHCI problem, > since xHCI has two buses. > > Below I supply another thought, please check if it is feasible. > In below design, you don't need to change any usb codes. > > dts: > > led_1 { > led_gpio_1; > usb_port = &ohci_port0, &ehci_port1; > } > > led_2 { > led_gpio_2; > usb_port = &xhci_port0, &xhci_port1; > } > > ohci@1000 { > compatible = "generic-ohci"; > reg = <0x00001000 0x1000>; > interrupts = ; > > ohci_port0: port@0 { > reg = <0>; > }; > > ohci_port1: port@1 { > reg = <1>; > }; > }; > > ehci@2000 { > compatible = "generic-ehci"; > reg = <0x00002000 0x1000>; > interrupts = ; > > ehci_port0: port@0 { > reg = <0>; > }; > > ehci_port1: port@1 { > reg = <1>; > }; > }; > > xhci@3000 { > compatible = "generic-xhci"; > reg = <0x00003000 0x1000>; > interrupts = ; > > /* for xhci, port 0 - [N-1] is USB3, N - [M-1] is USB2/1. > * The port 0 and port N is the same physical port > */ > xhci_port0: port@0 { > reg = <0>; > }; > > xhci_port1: port@1 { > reg = <1>; > }; > > }; > > At code, compare the usb_device's device_node at usbport_trig_notify > if it is at led_1's usb device list, light on it. that's what I was thinking, yes. Instead of maching a port number, match the actual device. -- balbi