Re: [RFC PATCH 1/4] dt-bindings: add bindings for USB physical connector

[Laurent Pinchart]

Hi Andrzej,

On Wednesday, 18 October 2017 18:11:25 EEST Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Thursday, 28 September 2017 16:07:27 EEST Andrzej Hajda wrote:
> > These bindings allows to describe most known standard USB connectors
> > and it should be possible to extend it if necessary.
> > USB connectors, beside USB can be used to route other protocols,
> > for example UART, Audio, MHL. In such case every device passing data
> > through the connector should have appropriate graph bindings.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > There are few things for discussion (IMO):
> > 1. vendor specific connectors, I have added them here, but maybe better is
> > 
> >    to place them in separate files.
> 
> It's useful to have one vendor-specific compatible string to be used in the
> example. We could split vendor-specific connectors to separate files later
> if needed, but for now I'm fine keeping them here.
> 
> > 2. physical connector description - I have split it to three properties:
> >    type(a,b,ab,c), max-mode(ls,fs,hs,ss,ss+), size(mini,micro,powered).
> >    This tripled is able to describe all USB-standard connectors, but there
> >    are also impossible combinations, for example(c, *, micro). Maybe
> >    better
> >    would be to just enumerate all possible connectors in include file.
> 
> I don't have a strong opinion on this. The three properties are nicely
> descriptive. You might want to list the valid combinations in the bindings
> though.
> 
> > 3. Numbering of port/remote nodes, currently only 0 is assigned for
> > 
> > Interface Controller. Maybe other functions should be also assigned:
> >    HS, SS, CC, SBU, ... whatever. Maybe functions should be described
> >    as an additional property of remote node?
> 
> Given that one of the main reasons this binding is needed is to describe MHL
> connection to a USB connector, I think we'll need to define additional
> functions, yes. I'm not sure yet how that should look like though.
> > ---
> > 
> >  .../bindings/connector/usb-connector.txt           | 49 +++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 49 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644
> > 
> > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/connector/usb-connector.txt
> > 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/connector/usb-connector.txt
> > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/connector/usb-connector.txt new file
> > mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..f3a4e85122d5
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/connector/usb-connector.txt
> > @@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
> > +USB Connector
> > +=============
> > +
> > +Required properties:
> > +- compatible: "usb-connector"
> > +  connectors with vendor specific extensions can add one of additional
> > +  compatibles:
> > +    "samsung,usb-connector-11pin": 11-pin Samsung micro-USB connector
> > +- type: the USB connector type: "a", "b", "ab", "c"
> > +- max-mode: max USB speed mode supported by the connector:
> > +  "ls", "fs", "hs", "ss", "ss+"
> > +
> > +Optional properties:
> > +- label: a symbolic name for the connector
> > +- size: size of the connector, should be specified in case of
> > +  non-standard USB connectors: "mini", "micro", "powered"
> 
> "non-standard" sounds like "vendor-specific", while I assume you're talking
> about the size. The USB specification uses the term "standard" for this
> purpose, so it's hard to use another one that would convey the right meaning
> precisely. Maybe "non-standard ('large') USB connector sizes" ?
> 
> > +Required nodes:
> > +- any data bus to the connector should be modeled using the
> > +  OF graph bindings specified in bindings/graph.txt.
> > +  There should be exactly one port with at least one endpoint to
> > +  different device nodes. The first endpoint (reg = <0>) should
> > +  point to USB Interface Controller.
> > +
> > +Example
> > +-------
> > +
> > +musb_con: connector {
> > +	compatible = "samsung,usb-connector-11pin", "usb-connector";
> > +	label = "usb";
> > +	type = "b";
> > +	size = "micro";
> > +	max-mode = "hs";
> > +
> > +	port {
> > +		#address-cells = <1>;
> > +		#size-cells = <0>;
> > +
> > +		musb_con_usb_in: endpoint@0 {
> > +			reg = <0>;
> > +			remote-endpoint = <&muic_usb_out>;
> > +		};
> > +
> > +		musb_con_mhl_in: endpoint@1 {
> > +			reg = <1>;
> > +			remote-endpoint = <&mhl_out>;
> > +		};
> > +	};
> > +};

One more comment, do I assume correctly that the Samsung 11-pin connector 
carries USB and MHL on different pins ?

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart