Hello Felipe,

On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 3:56 PM Felipe Balbi wrote:

<snip>

> On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 11:43:11AM +0200, Andrzej Pietrasiewicz wrote:
> > Demonstrate a USB gadget configured entirely through configfs.
> > This is a work in progress.
> >

<snip>

> 
> this is wrong. we don't want *another* gadget driver. We want to get rid
> of the ones we have. The end goal is to keep only f_* files in kernel.
> 

I definitely agree about f_* files. However, I think we need... something?
While Sebastian's recent patch series shows how to remove #include .c
lines from gadget code, it does not do anything about the gadgets in
the meaning that if we had e.g. g_zero module before, we _still_ have
the g_zero, _plus_ we have f_sourcesink and f_loopback modules.

In other words, one must still insmod g_zero (f_sourcesink and f_loopback
being automatically requested), possibly setting some parameters like
vendor id, product id and so on. The g_zero here contains
a usb_composite_driver which, after it gets probed, takes one udc.

I think what we want here is a possibility to configure multiple functions
in one gadget (under one udc, in other words).

So the "something" I mentioned earlier should be the place where the
usb_composite_driver is defined and probed. And I called this kind of
entity a "gadget". Any better name?

Does this sound reasonable to you? Or do you think about something
completely different?

Thanks,

AP




--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to