From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755400AbcHWUEV (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Aug 2016 16:04:21 -0400 Received: from mail-ua0-f169.google.com ([209.85.217.169]:33396 "EHLO mail-ua0-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755385AbcHWUER (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Aug 2016 16:04:17 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <147043245520.26915.14153612182716236022@sboyd-linaro> References: <20160707222114.1673-1-stephen.boyd@linaro.org> <20160707222114.1673-4-stephen.boyd@linaro.org> <20160708090458.GB20485@shlinux2> <147043245520.26915.14153612182716236022@sboyd-linaro> From: Stephen Boyd Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 12:58:07 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/22] usb: ulpi: Support device discovery via device properties To: Peter Chen , Heikki Krogerus Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Andy Gross , Bjorn Andersson , Neil Armstrong , Arnd Bergmann , Felipe Balbi , Greg Kroah-Hartman , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote: > Quoting Peter Chen (2016-07-08 02:04:58) >> On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 03:20:54PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: >> > @@ -39,6 +42,10 @@ static int ulpi_match(struct device *dev, struct device_driver *driver) >> > struct ulpi *ulpi = to_ulpi_dev(dev); >> > const struct ulpi_device_id *id; >> > >> > + /* Some ULPI devices don't have a product id so rely on OF match */ >> > + if (ulpi->id.product == 0) >> > + return of_driver_match_device(dev, driver); >> > + >> >> How about using vendor id? It can't be 0, but pid may be 0. >> See: http://www.linux-usb.org/usb.ids > > Heikki suggested a product id of 0 would mean we need to use DT > matching. Should it be changed to vendor id instead? Any comments here?