On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 09:14:36PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:

On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 02:14:15PM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:

quoted

On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 06:41:23AM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:

quoted

On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 10:05:21PM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:

quoted

On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 04:07:17PM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:

quoted

On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 10:43:56AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:

quoted

On Tue, May 18, 2021 at 02:40:47PM -0700, Matthias Kaehlcke wrote:

quoted

Could you also have a look at "[4/5] usb: host: xhci-plat:
Create platform device for onboard hubs in probe()"
(https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1425453/)? It's a
relatively short patch that creates the platform device for
the driver from xhci-plat as you suggested in the v4
discussion.

I'm not the maintainer for xhci-related drivers.

However, there is at least one thing about this patch which looks 
suspicious: Adding the onboard_hub_dev pointer to struct usb_hcd instead 
of to struct xhci_plat_priv, where it would make a lot more sense.

I can move it to struct usb_hcd if that's preferred

Thinko: The patch already has it in struct usb_hcd.  I suggested moving 
it to struct xhci_plat_priv.

Ah, didn't actively recall to which struct I added it to, it has been a
while since I wrote that patch ;-)

quoted

Agreed that struct xhci_plat_priv is a better place.

Or not, xhci_plat_priv is optional, which doesn't make it a good candidate
for holding a field that could be used by any xHCI controller.

You could always allocate an xhci_plat_priv structure in cases where an 
onboard-hub device is present, if one doesn't exist already.

that's an option, thanks for the suggestion.

quoted

Should I move the field to struct xhci_hcd instead?

That's another option.

Look, I'm not the person you should be asking about this.  What I say 
doesn't matter -- you need to get approval from Mathias Nyman, the 
xhci-hcd maintainer.

ok, thanks