Re: [PATCH 01/10] added media agnostic (MA) USB HCD driver
On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 04:13:55PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 04:04:42PM -0800, steph wrote:
On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 01:21:39PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 12:42:48PM -0800, Stephanie Wallick wrote:
[snip]
+static int mausb_hcd_init(void)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ /* register HCD driver */
+ ret = platform_driver_register(mausb_driver);
Why is this a platform driver? How does this relate to platform
hardware?
The driver doesn't require platform resources. It looks like a host
controller driver but communicates over the network instead of to
a physical host controller. There is no MA USB-specific hardware.
Should we use a struct device instead of a struct platform_device?
Yes, please make it a virtual device.
Is it OK for our virtual host controller to use struct platform_device?
The other virtual host controllers (usbip/vhci_hcd.c gadget/udc/dummy_hcd.c)
use the platform_device struct. Unless I am missing something, it doesn't look
like the other virtual host controllers use platform resources.
If it is not ok, is there a good example somewhere of a virtual non-platform
device?
Thank You,
Sean O. Stalley
___
devel mailing list
de...@linuxdriverproject.org
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
Re: [PATCH 10/10] added kernel build, configuration, and TODO files
On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 01:24:04PM -0800, Greg KH wrote: On Mon, Nov 03, 2014 at 12:42:57PM -0800, Stephanie Wallick wrote: --- /dev/null +++ b/drivers/staging/mausb/TODO @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ +TODO: +- checkpatch.pl cleanups Is this still true? checkpatch.pl reports: total: 7 errors, 208 warnings, 10489 lines checked And why does this need to be a staging driver? What's wrong with making it a real driver now? The short answer is: We don't think it's ready to be real. We didn't want to release it as a real driver because: - It's not stable enough yet. - It doesn't implement all the features required by the MA USB spec. - The MA USB spec isn't standalone. It requires a supplemental spec to define media-specific behavior, like how MA USB packets are encapsulated, how to discover MA USB devices on a network, etc. So far, no media-specific specifications have been published. - There are no commercially-available Media Agnostic USB devices. We wanted to release it to staging now because: - We have received requests from multiple companies for our host MA USB driver. Putting it in staging seemed the best way to distribute it. - We feel that releasing what we have to staging now could promote collaboration on one driver help prevent duplicate work. +- address miscellaneous TODO statements in code +- add support for multiple media agnostic (MA) devices +- add/improve support for unimplemented packet types +- handle errors and failure with more grace and less crash + +Please send patches to Greg Kroah-Hartman g...@kroah.com and cc: You didn't use this email address... +Sean Stalley sean.stal...@intel.com +Stephanie Wallick stephanie.s.wall...@intel.com + Just make a MAINTAINERS entry please for this info. We will include a MAINTAINERS entry in our next patch in lieu of emails (especially incorrect emails) in the TODO. Thanks, Sean ___ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
Re: [PATCH 00/10] MA USB drivers cover letter
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 10:00:32AM +0100, Bjørn Mork wrote: [added linux-...@vger.kernel.org Cc] Nice. But don't you think this deserves the attention of the linux-usb mailing list? Yes, Greg's attention is of course good to have too :-) But I believe this is of interest to more people, who might not read everything on linux-kernel. This is probably more relevant/interesting to the people on linux-usb. Since we were trying to get this driver into staging, we thought linux-kernel was the right place to send the patches. We can send the next set out to linux-usb as well. Has there been any thought/discussion about the relationship to the existing usbip drivers, which just moved out of staging? Is a usbip userspace compatibility layer feasible sometime in the future? That discussion hasn't happened. usbip has a different protocol than MA USB, so much of the code cannot be reused. I just briefly looked into the userspace code for usbip. It looks like the userspace compatibility layer is just a utility for establishing the TCP connection between the host and device choosing what devices to connect, correct? We have a similar utility (see patch 9/10) which could probably be replaced by the usbip userspace utilities. Bjørn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ ___ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
Re: [PATCH 00/10] MA USB drivers cover letter
On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 10:00:32AM +0100, Bjørn Mork wrote: [added linux-...@vger.kernel.org Cc] Nice. But don't you think this deserves the attention of the linux-usb mailing list? Yes, Greg's attention is of course good to have too :-) But I believe this is of interest to more people, who might not read everything on linux-kernel. This is probably more relevant/interesting to the people on linux-usb. Since we were trying to get this driver into staging, we thought linux-kernel was the right place to send the patches. We can send the next set out to linux-usb as well. Has there been any thought/discussion about the relationship to the existing usbip drivers, which just moved out of staging? Is a usbip userspace compatibility layer feasible sometime in the future? That discussion hasn't happened. usbip has a different protocol than MA USB, so much of the code cannot be reused. I just briefly looked into the userspace code for usbip. It looks like the userspace compatibility layer is just a utility for establishing the TCP connection between the host and device choosing what devices to connect, correct? We have a similar utility (see patch 9/10) which could probably be replaced by the usbip userspace utilities. Bjørn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ ___ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
Re: [PATCH 00/10] MA USB drivers cover letter
[with a valid Message-ID] On Tue, Nov 04, 2014 at 10:00:32AM +0100, Bjørn Mork wrote: [added linux-...@vger.kernel.org Cc] Stephanie Wallick stephanie.s.wall...@intel.com writes: Media Agnostic (MA) USB enables the USB protocol to be used over a wide range of physical media. MA USB is a relatively new protocol and is currently unsupported in the Linux kernel. This patch set adds the following drivers with the following capabilities: 1) MA USB Host: - provides functionality of a USB Host Controller. - implements MA USB protocol for a MA USB host. - provides MA USB packet transport over TCP 2) MA USB Device: - provides functionality of a USB Device Controller. - implements MA USB protocol for a MA USB device. - provides MA USB packet transport over TCP Nice. But don't you think this deserves the attention of the linux-usb mailing list? Yes, Greg's attention is of course good to have too :-) But I believe this is of interest to more people, who might not read everything on linux-kernel. This is probably more relevant/interesting to the people on linux-usb. Since we were trying to get this driver into staging, we thought linux-kernel was the right place to send the patches. We can send the next set out to linux-usb as well. Has there been any thought/discussion about the relationship to the existing usbip drivers, which just moved out of staging? Is a usbip userspace compatibility layer feasible sometime in the future? That discussion hasn't happened. usbip has a different protocol than MA USB, so much of the code cannot be reused. I just briefly looked into the userspace code for usbip. It looks like the userspace compatibility layer is just a utility for establishing the TCP connection between the host and device choosing what devices to connect, correct? We have a similar utility (see patch 9/10) which could probably be replaced by the usbip userspace utilities. Thanks, Sean ___ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
