Hi Jean-Jacques, On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 at 05:32, Jean-Jacques Hiblot <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Simon, > > On 30/03/2019 22:18, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Jean-Jacques, > > > > On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 at 10:44, Jean-Jacques Hiblot <[email protected]> wrote: > >> This uclass is intended for devices that do not need any features from the > >> uclass, including binding children. > >> This will typically be used by devices that are used to bind child devices > >> but do not use dm_scan_fdt_dev() to do it. > >> > > Can you expand this motivation a little? I am not sure why calling > > dm_scan_fdt_dev() would be problematic. > > In the case of the USB wrappers, there are 2 children nodes: one for > peripheral and one for host. The wrapper binds only one of them. > dm_scan_fdt_dev() would bind both.
OK, please add this to the commit message and your uclass header file (or wherever else you can add docs for this uclass). > > > > > Also if you do add a new uclass it should have a sandbox driver and test. > > There isn't much to test, except to check that the uclass is present. > The UCLASS itself does not provide any feature. Well, one feature is that it does not scan its children. So you could add a child node in test.dts and test that it does not get bound. Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
