On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 4:25 AM, Pavan Kondeti <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi > > I am working on adding USB device tree support for MSM platform. One of > our chip set has 2 hsusb cores. The first core is configured as otg and > the other core is configured in host only mode (EHCI compliant). Are the > below device node names Okay? Please suggest. > > hsusb0-otg: usb@0xa6000000 { > compatible = "qcom,hsusb-otg"; > --- > }; > > hsusb0-device: usb@0xa6000000 { > compatible = "qcom,hsusb-device"; > --- > }; > > hsusb0-host: usb@0xa6000000 { > compatible = "qcom,hsusb-host", "usb-ehci"; > --- > }; > > hsusb1-host: usb@0xa6000000 { > compatible = "qcom,hsusb-host", "usb-ehci"; > --- > }; > > /* super speed support > > ssusb0-device: usb@0xa6000000 { > compatible = "qcom,ssusb-device"; > };
The host controller node names as "usb@<adddr>" as you have here is exactly right. The driver doesn't care and will only look at the compatible list. OTG controllers can also use "usb@" as the prefix. Controllers that are only in device mode should probably be called something like "usb-gadget@<addr>" or similar, because "usb@" is used for host controllers. The label names (hsusb*-host, hsusb*-device) are completely irrelevant since Linux never sees them. Use whatever you want for the label names. Also, the form of the node name is: "usb@a6000000" (without '0x' in the address). g. _______________________________________________ devicetree-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
