[U-Boot] [PATCH] usb: host: Print device name when scanning

From: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut@gmail.com>
To: u-boot@lists.denx.de
Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] usb: host: Print device name when scanning
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 13:04:44 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b56fff33-9488-84da-5654-ad6e4797d7e9@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190318120236.GB4316@kiki>

On 3/18/19 1:02 PM, Ismael Luceno Cortes wrote:
> On 16/Mar/2019 02:41, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 3/15/19 8:50 PM, Ismael Luceno Cortes wrote:
>>> On 15/Mar/2019 18:34, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>> On 3/14/19 5:19 PM, Ismael Luceno Cortes wrote:
>>>>> On 14/Mar/2019 16:09, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>>>> On 3/14/19 1:57 PM, Ismael Luceno Cortes wrote:
>>>>>>> On 14/Mar/2019 12:55, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 3/14/19 12:44 PM, Ismael Luceno Cortes wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 18/Feb/2019 09:23, Ismael Luceno Cortes wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Ismael Luceno <ismael.luceno@silicon-gears.com>
>>>>>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>>>>>  drivers/usb/host/usb-uclass.c | 2 +-
>>>>>>>>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/usb-uclass.c b/drivers/usb/host/usb-uclass.c
>>>>>>>>>> index 611ea97a72..0575f5393b 100644
>>>>>>>>>> --- a/drivers/usb/host/usb-uclass.c
>>>>>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/usb-uclass.c
>>>>>>>>>> @@ -255,7 +255,7 @@ int usb_init(void)
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>  	uclass_foreach_dev(bus, uc) {
>>>>>>>>>>  		/* init low_level USB */
>>>>>>>>>> -		printf("USB%d:   ", count);
>>>>>>>>>> +		printf("USB%d(%s):   ", count, bus->name);
>>>>>>>>>>  		count++;
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>  #ifdef CONFIG_SANDBOX
>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>> 2.19.1
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Ping.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What is this patch doing ? The commit description doesn't explain
>>>>>>>> anything about it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It prints the host device name. I'm not sure the count is at all useful
>>>>>>> given there's a name...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If you could share the log before and after to better illustrate the
>>>>>> difference, that'd be nice.
>>>>>
>>>>> unpatched:
>>>>>
>>>>> => usb reset
>>>>> resetting USB...
>>>>> USB0:   USB EHCI 1.10
>>>>> scanning bus 0 for devices... 2 USB Device(s) found
>>>>>        scanning usb for storage devices... 1 Storage Device(s) found
>>>>>
>>>>> patched:
>>>>>
>>>>> => usb reset
>>>>> resetting USB...
>>>>> USB0(usb at ee080100):   USB EHCI 1.10
>>>>> scanning bus 0 for devices... 2 USB Device(s) found
>>>>>        scanning usb for storage devices... 1 Storage Device(s) found
>>>>>
>>>>>> However, shouldn't the same approach be applied to 'usb tree' subcommand
>>>>>> and possibly others ?
>>>>>
>>>>> The number shown during usb scanning is not used nor saved anywhere
>>>>> else, so seems pretty useless and a special case.
>>>>
>>>> What about usb part ? That one uses the number somehow I think ?
>>>
>>> Not this number.
>>
>> Lovely.
>>
>> Anyway, this looks good, can you repost this patch with proper commit
>> message, ideally with the example output above so I can pick it for next ?
> 
> Ok.
> 
>>>>> OTOH the number used in the usb tree command is taken from struct
>>>>> usb_device, and is used for lookups.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe it's time to clean that numbering mess up a bit , and make it
>>>> consistent ?
>>>
>>> Maybe implement it like a vfs? It would force some consistency into the
>>> drivers and commands.
>>
>> Do you want to take that one up ? :)
> 
> I would consider implementing it. Is there any preferences?

Prepare an RFC patchset and we'll see how that looks :)

-- 
Best regards,
Marek Vasut