From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jean-Jacques Hiblot Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2019 13:32:08 +0200 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] dm: Add a No-op uclass In-Reply-To: References: <20190322164429.28637-1-jjhiblot@ti.com> Message-ID: <94e5e0c9-1e8c-8074-45d2-ee6ed5c4b793@ti.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de Hi Simon, On 30/03/2019 22:18, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Jean-Jacques, > > On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 at 10:44, Jean-Jacques Hiblot wrote: >> This uclass is intended for devices that do not need any features from the >> uclass, including binding children. >> This will typically be used by devices that are used to bind child devices >> but do not use dm_scan_fdt_dev() to do it. >> > Can you expand this motivation a little? I am not sure why calling > dm_scan_fdt_dev() would be problematic. In the case of the USB wrappers, there are 2 children nodes: one for peripheral and one for host. The wrapper binds only one of them. dm_scan_fdt_dev() would bind both. > > Also if you do add a new uclass it should have a sandbox driver and test. There isn't much to test, except to check that the uclass is present. The UCLASS itself does not provide any feature. JJ > > Regards, > Simon >