From: zhangfei.gao@linaro.org (zhangfei)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v4 4/4] phy: add phy-hi6220-usb
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 21:28:36 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54EDCE04.3040404@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150223153612.GF32701@saruman.tx.rr.com>
On 02/23/2015 11:36 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 11:10:36AM +0800, zhangfei wrote:
>>>>>>>> +static void hi6220_start_peripheral(struct hi6220_priv *priv, bool on)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + struct usb_otg *otg = priv->phy.otg;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + if (!otg->gadget)
>>>>>>>> + return;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + if (on)
>>>>>>>> + usb_gadget_connect(otg->gadget);
>>>>>>>> + else
>>>>>>>> + usb_gadget_disconnect(otg->gadget);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> why is the PHY fiddling with pullups ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We use this to enable/disable otg gadget mode.
>>>>>
>>>>> I got that, but the pullups don't belong to the PHY, they belong to the
>>>>> gadget.
>>>>>
>>>>>> The gpio_id & gpio_vbus are used to distinguish otg gadget mode or
>>>>>> host mode.
>>>>>> When micro usb or otg device attached to otg, gpio_vbus falling down.
>>>>>> And gpio_id = 1 is micro usb, gpio_id = 0 is otg device.
>>>>>
>>>>> all of that I understood clearly :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>> So when micro usb attached, we enable gadget mode; while micro usb
>>>>>> detached, we disable gadget mode, and dwc2 will automatically set to
>>>>>> host mode.
>>>>>
>>>>> that's all fine, I'm concerned about letting the PHY fiddle with
>>>>> something it doesn't own. If I am to change pullups rules in udc-core,
>>>>> this is likely to break down miserably and I don't want to have to go
>>>>> through that.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the clarifying.
>>>
>>> no problem.
>>>
>>>> How about using usb_gadget_vbus_connect/disconnect, which are used in many
>>>> files under drivers/usb/phy.
>>>> There is no vbus_session in dwc2/gadget.c, I thought it would be same as
>>>> pullup.
>>>>
>>>> However, usb_gadget_vbus_connect still need para gadget, where should we put
>>>> this file, drivers/usb/phy or drivers/phy
>>>
>>> drivers/phy, if the framework misses anything you need, it's a great
>>> opportunity to give back to the community by extending the framework.
>>
>> Sorry, I am a little confused.
>> I need some concrete suggestion for the next step of this patch, which is
>> required for the community board, hikey board.
>>
>> Do you mean in the future we need use hsotg->phy instead of hsotg->uphy.
>> struct phy *phy;
>> struct usb_phy *uphy;
>
> yes, we need to move everybody to use struct phy, instead of struct
> usb_phy.
>
>> usb_phy has many members that struct phy does not have, including otg.
>> struct usb_otg *otg;
>> Is that mean we need port such member from usb_phy to phy.
>
> This means we have a little ground work to do before we can add your phy
> driver to that framework, right ? As I said, if the framework is missing
> anything, work with Kishon (generic phy maintainer) to add those missing
> pieces generically.
OK, got it.
>
>> Besides, are you ok with using usb_gadget_vbus_connect/disconnect.
>>
>>>
>>> Scratching one's own itch kinda thing...
>>>
>>>>>>>> +static void hi6220_detect_work(struct work_struct *work)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + struct hi6220_priv *priv =
>>>>>>>> + container_of(work, struct hi6220_priv, work.work);
>>>>>>>> + int gpio_id, gpio_vbus;
>>>>>>>> + enum usb_otg_state state;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + if (!gpio_is_valid(priv->gpio_id) || !gpio_is_valid(priv->gpio_vbus))
>>>>>>>> + return;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + gpio_id = gpio_get_value_cansleep(priv->gpio_id);
>>>>>>>> + gpio_vbus = gpio_get_value_cansleep(priv->gpio_vbus);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> looks like this should be using extcon
>>>>>> Not used extcon before.
>>>>>> However, we need gpio_vbus interrupt.
>>>>>> Checked phy-tahvo.c and phy-omap-otg.c, not find extcon related with
>>>>>> interrupt.
>>>>>> Will investigate tomorrow.
>>>>>
>>>>> drivers/extcon/extcon-gpio.c
>>>> I think there is no need to use extcon, gpio is clear enough.
>>>> extcon-gpio.c even do not support dt.
>>>
>>> well, add DT. The whole idea of free software is that we improve on
>>> things we already have. EXTCON is *the* API to handle such things.
>>
>> I think I am still not understanding extcon-gpio, not sure why need
>> use this API here.
>
> because extcon is the API to use for external connectors. The same way
> you use regulator framework to control that single GPIO tied to an
> enable signal of a fixed regulator, you use extcon when you need to read
> that gpio signal tied to id pin of the USB connector.
>
>> Here two gpio requires, one gpio as interrupt, in the interrupt
>> handler, we detect the gpio status judging the otg status.
>> extcon-gpio.c use the interrupt, then can we also use the gpio
>> interrupt. Using extcon-gpio is used for saving gpio_request?
>
> extcon is used to hide gpio_request from dwc2. dwc2 only knows about
> extcon, not gpios. extcon will request the gpio and use it as interrupt
> source. When an IRQ fires, it will read the gpio state and decide if it
> should broadcast a message to tell dwc2 to become host or peripheral.
Thanks for the kind education, understand now.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: zhangfei <zhangfei.gao@linaro.org>
To: balbi@ti.com
Cc: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com>,
mark.rutland@arm.com, Peter Chen <peter.chen@freescale.com>,
Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>,
"dan . zhao" <dan.zhao@hisilicon.com>,
Wangbinghui <wangbinghui@hisilicon.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] phy: add phy-hi6220-usb
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 21:28:36 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <54EDCE04.3040404@linaro.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150223153612.GF32701@saruman.tx.rr.com>
On 02/23/2015 11:36 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 11:10:36AM +0800, zhangfei wrote:
>>>>>>>> +static void hi6220_start_peripheral(struct hi6220_priv *priv, bool on)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + struct usb_otg *otg = priv->phy.otg;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + if (!otg->gadget)
>>>>>>>> + return;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + if (on)
>>>>>>>> + usb_gadget_connect(otg->gadget);
>>>>>>>> + else
>>>>>>>> + usb_gadget_disconnect(otg->gadget);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> why is the PHY fiddling with pullups ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We use this to enable/disable otg gadget mode.
>>>>>
>>>>> I got that, but the pullups don't belong to the PHY, they belong to the
>>>>> gadget.
>>>>>
>>>>>> The gpio_id & gpio_vbus are used to distinguish otg gadget mode or
>>>>>> host mode.
>>>>>> When micro usb or otg device attached to otg, gpio_vbus falling down.
>>>>>> And gpio_id = 1 is micro usb, gpio_id = 0 is otg device.
>>>>>
>>>>> all of that I understood clearly :-)
>>>>>
>>>>>> So when micro usb attached, we enable gadget mode; while micro usb
>>>>>> detached, we disable gadget mode, and dwc2 will automatically set to
>>>>>> host mode.
>>>>>
>>>>> that's all fine, I'm concerned about letting the PHY fiddle with
>>>>> something it doesn't own. If I am to change pullups rules in udc-core,
>>>>> this is likely to break down miserably and I don't want to have to go
>>>>> through that.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the clarifying.
>>>
>>> no problem.
>>>
>>>> How about using usb_gadget_vbus_connect/disconnect, which are used in many
>>>> files under drivers/usb/phy.
>>>> There is no vbus_session in dwc2/gadget.c, I thought it would be same as
>>>> pullup.
>>>>
>>>> However, usb_gadget_vbus_connect still need para gadget, where should we put
>>>> this file, drivers/usb/phy or drivers/phy
>>>
>>> drivers/phy, if the framework misses anything you need, it's a great
>>> opportunity to give back to the community by extending the framework.
>>
>> Sorry, I am a little confused.
>> I need some concrete suggestion for the next step of this patch, which is
>> required for the community board, hikey board.
>>
>> Do you mean in the future we need use hsotg->phy instead of hsotg->uphy.
>> struct phy *phy;
>> struct usb_phy *uphy;
>
> yes, we need to move everybody to use struct phy, instead of struct
> usb_phy.
>
>> usb_phy has many members that struct phy does not have, including otg.
>> struct usb_otg *otg;
>> Is that mean we need port such member from usb_phy to phy.
>
> This means we have a little ground work to do before we can add your phy
> driver to that framework, right ? As I said, if the framework is missing
> anything, work with Kishon (generic phy maintainer) to add those missing
> pieces generically.
OK, got it.
>
>> Besides, are you ok with using usb_gadget_vbus_connect/disconnect.
>>
>>>
>>> Scratching one's own itch kinda thing...
>>>
>>>>>>>> +static void hi6220_detect_work(struct work_struct *work)
>>>>>>>> +{
>>>>>>>> + struct hi6220_priv *priv =
>>>>>>>> + container_of(work, struct hi6220_priv, work.work);
>>>>>>>> + int gpio_id, gpio_vbus;
>>>>>>>> + enum usb_otg_state state;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + if (!gpio_is_valid(priv->gpio_id) || !gpio_is_valid(priv->gpio_vbus))
>>>>>>>> + return;
>>>>>>>> +
>>>>>>>> + gpio_id = gpio_get_value_cansleep(priv->gpio_id);
>>>>>>>> + gpio_vbus = gpio_get_value_cansleep(priv->gpio_vbus);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> looks like this should be using extcon
>>>>>> Not used extcon before.
>>>>>> However, we need gpio_vbus interrupt.
>>>>>> Checked phy-tahvo.c and phy-omap-otg.c, not find extcon related with
>>>>>> interrupt.
>>>>>> Will investigate tomorrow.
>>>>>
>>>>> drivers/extcon/extcon-gpio.c
>>>> I think there is no need to use extcon, gpio is clear enough.
>>>> extcon-gpio.c even do not support dt.
>>>
>>> well, add DT. The whole idea of free software is that we improve on
>>> things we already have. EXTCON is *the* API to handle such things.
>>
>> I think I am still not understanding extcon-gpio, not sure why need
>> use this API here.
>
> because extcon is the API to use for external connectors. The same way
> you use regulator framework to control that single GPIO tied to an
> enable signal of a fixed regulator, you use extcon when you need to read
> that gpio signal tied to id pin of the USB connector.
>
>> Here two gpio requires, one gpio as interrupt, in the interrupt
>> handler, we detect the gpio status judging the otg status.
>> extcon-gpio.c use the interrupt, then can we also use the gpio
>> interrupt. Using extcon-gpio is used for saving gpio_request?
>
> extcon is used to hide gpio_request from dwc2. dwc2 only knows about
> extcon, not gpios. extcon will request the gpio and use it as interrupt
> source. When an IRQ fires, it will read the gpio state and decide if it
> should broadcast a message to tell dwc2 to become host or peripheral.
Thanks for the kind education, understand now.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-25 13:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-02-12 7:37 [PATCH v4 0/4] add usb support for hi6220 Zhangfei Gao
2015-02-12 7:37 ` Zhangfei Gao
2015-02-12 7:37 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] Documentation: dt-bindings: add dt binding info for hi6220 dwc2 Zhangfei Gao
2015-02-12 7:37 ` Zhangfei Gao
2015-02-12 7:37 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] Documentation: dt-bindings: add dt binding info for hi6220 Zhangfei Gao
2015-02-12 7:37 ` Zhangfei Gao
2015-02-12 7:37 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] usb: dwc2: platform: add hi6220 support Zhangfei Gao
2015-02-12 7:37 ` Zhangfei Gao
2015-02-12 7:37 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] phy: add phy-hi6220-usb Zhangfei Gao
2015-02-12 7:37 ` Zhangfei Gao
2015-02-18 5:35 ` Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2015-02-18 5:35 ` Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2015-02-18 5:35 ` Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2015-02-18 5:44 ` zhangfei
2015-02-18 5:44 ` zhangfei
2015-02-18 14:35 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-18 14:35 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-18 14:35 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-20 3:07 ` zhangfei
2015-02-20 3:07 ` zhangfei
2015-02-20 4:38 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-20 4:38 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-20 4:38 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-20 10:27 ` zhangfei
2015-02-20 10:27 ` zhangfei
2015-02-20 10:27 ` zhangfei
2015-02-20 14:41 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-20 14:41 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-20 14:41 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-20 15:44 ` zhangfei
2015-02-20 15:44 ` zhangfei
2015-02-20 15:44 ` zhangfei
2015-02-20 16:06 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-20 16:06 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-20 16:06 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-21 15:03 ` zhangfei
2015-02-21 15:03 ` zhangfei
2015-02-21 16:21 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-21 16:21 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-21 16:21 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-22 3:10 ` zhangfei
2015-02-22 3:10 ` zhangfei
2015-02-23 15:36 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-23 15:36 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-23 15:36 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-25 13:28 ` zhangfei [this message]
2015-02-25 13:28 ` zhangfei
2015-02-25 16:32 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-25 16:32 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-25 16:32 ` Felipe Balbi
2015-02-24 10:13 ` Roger Quadros
2015-02-24 10:13 ` Roger Quadros
2015-02-24 10:13 ` Roger Quadros
2015-02-26 8:48 ` zhangfei
2015-02-26 8:48 ` zhangfei
2015-02-26 8:48 ` zhangfei
2015-02-26 9:36 ` Roger Quadros
2015-02-26 9:36 ` Roger Quadros
2015-02-26 9:36 ` Roger Quadros
2015-02-27 2:07 ` Peter Chen
2015-02-27 2:07 ` Peter Chen
2015-02-27 2:07 ` Peter Chen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=54EDCE04.3040404@linaro.org \
--to=zhangfei.gao@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.