All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Cc: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com>,
	Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..."
	<linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org>,
	Romain Perier <romain.perier@gmail.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/8] phy: rockchip-usb: introduce a common data-struct for the device
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 00:55:10 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6210861.uglufxBnXQ@phil> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAD=FV=Uf0w0buknqwvW+ufao64m78i3B7Goza2pGCkjDSPU0tA@mail.gmail.com>

Am Mittwoch, 4. November 2015, 15:46:04 schrieb Doug Anderson:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de> wrote:
> > This introduces a common struct that holds data belonging to
> > the umbrella device that contains all the phys and that we
> > want to use later.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
> > ---
> >  drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++-------
> >  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c
> > index dfc056b..dda1994 100644
> > --- a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c
> > +++ b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c
> > @@ -36,9 +36,14 @@
> >  #define SIDDQ_ON               BIT(13)
> >  #define SIDDQ_OFF              (0 << 13)
> >
> > +struct rockchip_usb_phy_base {
> > +       struct device *dev;
> > +       struct regmap *reg_base;
> > +};
> > +
> >  struct rockchip_usb_phy {
> > +       struct rockchip_usb_phy_base *base;
> >         unsigned int    reg_offset;
> > -       struct regmap   *reg_base;
> >         struct clk      *clk;
> >         struct phy      *phy;
> >  };
> > @@ -46,7 +51,7 @@ struct rockchip_usb_phy {
> >  static int rockchip_usb_phy_power(struct rockchip_usb_phy *phy,
> >                                            bool siddq)
> >  {
> > -       return regmap_write(phy->reg_base, phy->reg_offset,
> > +       return regmap_write(phy->base->reg_base, phy->reg_offset,
> >                             SIDDQ_WRITE_ENA | (siddq ? SIDDQ_ON : SIDDQ_OFF));
> >  }
> >
> > @@ -101,17 +106,23 @@ static void rockchip_usb_phy_action(void *data)
> >  static int rockchip_usb_phy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >  {
> >         struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > +       struct rockchip_usb_phy_base *phy_base;
> >         struct rockchip_usb_phy *rk_phy;
> >         struct phy_provider *phy_provider;
> >         struct device_node *child;
> > -       struct regmap *grf;
> >         unsigned int reg_offset;
> >         int err;
> >
> > -       grf = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(dev->of_node, "rockchip,grf");
> > -       if (IS_ERR(grf)) {
> > +       phy_base = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*phy_base), GFP_KERNEL);
> > +       if (!phy_base)
> > +               return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > +       phy_base->dev = dev;
> > +       phy_base->reg_base = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(dev->of_node,
> > +                                                            "rockchip,grf");
> > +       if (IS_ERR(phy_base->reg_base)) {
> >                 dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Missing rockchip,grf property\n");
> > -               return PTR_ERR(grf);
> > +               return PTR_ERR(phy_base->reg_base);
> >         }
> >
> >         for_each_available_child_of_node(dev->of_node, child) {
> > @@ -126,7 +137,6 @@ static int rockchip_usb_phy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >                 }
> >
> >                 rk_phy->reg_offset = reg_offset;
> > -               rk_phy->reg_base = grf;
> 
> I'm probably missing something, but I would have expected a line line:
> 
>   rk_phy->base = phy_base;
> 
> Otherwise how does "base" get assigned?  Ah, I see.  You forgot it in
> this patch and then cheated and slipped it in in patch #3.  ;)  For
> nice bisectability it probably belongs here, too...

Thanks for that catch and yep, it should definitly be here too. While
I did a compile-test for the individual steps, I guess I did not do
runtime tests for each.

I guess this is what happens when you try to separate a final work into
separate steps :-) . I'll send a revised version hopefully tomorrow.


Heiko

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: heiko@sntech.de (Heiko Stuebner)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/8] phy: rockchip-usb: introduce a common data-struct for the device
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 00:55:10 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <6210861.uglufxBnXQ@phil> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAD=FV=Uf0w0buknqwvW+ufao64m78i3B7Goza2pGCkjDSPU0tA@mail.gmail.com>

Am Mittwoch, 4. November 2015, 15:46:04 schrieb Doug Anderson:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de> wrote:
> > This introduces a common struct that holds data belonging to
> > the umbrella device that contains all the phys and that we
> > want to use later.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
> > ---
> >  drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++-------
> >  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c
> > index dfc056b..dda1994 100644
> > --- a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c
> > +++ b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c
> > @@ -36,9 +36,14 @@
> >  #define SIDDQ_ON               BIT(13)
> >  #define SIDDQ_OFF              (0 << 13)
> >
> > +struct rockchip_usb_phy_base {
> > +       struct device *dev;
> > +       struct regmap *reg_base;
> > +};
> > +
> >  struct rockchip_usb_phy {
> > +       struct rockchip_usb_phy_base *base;
> >         unsigned int    reg_offset;
> > -       struct regmap   *reg_base;
> >         struct clk      *clk;
> >         struct phy      *phy;
> >  };
> > @@ -46,7 +51,7 @@ struct rockchip_usb_phy {
> >  static int rockchip_usb_phy_power(struct rockchip_usb_phy *phy,
> >                                            bool siddq)
> >  {
> > -       return regmap_write(phy->reg_base, phy->reg_offset,
> > +       return regmap_write(phy->base->reg_base, phy->reg_offset,
> >                             SIDDQ_WRITE_ENA | (siddq ? SIDDQ_ON : SIDDQ_OFF));
> >  }
> >
> > @@ -101,17 +106,23 @@ static void rockchip_usb_phy_action(void *data)
> >  static int rockchip_usb_phy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >  {
> >         struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > +       struct rockchip_usb_phy_base *phy_base;
> >         struct rockchip_usb_phy *rk_phy;
> >         struct phy_provider *phy_provider;
> >         struct device_node *child;
> > -       struct regmap *grf;
> >         unsigned int reg_offset;
> >         int err;
> >
> > -       grf = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(dev->of_node, "rockchip,grf");
> > -       if (IS_ERR(grf)) {
> > +       phy_base = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*phy_base), GFP_KERNEL);
> > +       if (!phy_base)
> > +               return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > +       phy_base->dev = dev;
> > +       phy_base->reg_base = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(dev->of_node,
> > +                                                            "rockchip,grf");
> > +       if (IS_ERR(phy_base->reg_base)) {
> >                 dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Missing rockchip,grf property\n");
> > -               return PTR_ERR(grf);
> > +               return PTR_ERR(phy_base->reg_base);
> >         }
> >
> >         for_each_available_child_of_node(dev->of_node, child) {
> > @@ -126,7 +137,6 @@ static int rockchip_usb_phy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >                 }
> >
> >                 rk_phy->reg_offset = reg_offset;
> > -               rk_phy->reg_base = grf;
> 
> I'm probably missing something, but I would have expected a line line:
> 
>   rk_phy->base = phy_base;
> 
> Otherwise how does "base" get assigned?  Ah, I see.  You forgot it in
> this patch and then cheated and slipped it in in patch #3.  ;)  For
> nice bisectability it probably belongs here, too...

Thanks for that catch and yep, it should definitly be here too. While
I did a compile-test for the individual steps, I guess I did not do
runtime tests for each.

I guess this is what happens when you try to separate a final work into
separate steps :-) . I'll send a revised version hopefully tomorrow.


Heiko

  reply	other threads:[~2015-11-04 23:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-11-04 21:44 [PATCH 0/8] phy: rockchip-usb: correct pll handling and usb-uart Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 21:44 ` Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 21:44 ` [PATCH 1/8] phy: rockchip-usb: fix clock get-put mismatch Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 21:44   ` Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 23:34   ` Doug Anderson
2015-11-04 23:34     ` Doug Anderson
     [not found]   ` <1446673454-9529-2-git-send-email-heiko-4mtYJXux2i+zQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org>
2015-11-13  6:28     ` Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2015-11-13  6:28       ` Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2015-11-13  6:28       ` Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2015-11-04 21:44 ` [PATCH 2/8] phy: rockchip-usb: introduce a common data-struct for the device Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 21:44   ` Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 23:46   ` Doug Anderson
2015-11-04 23:46     ` Doug Anderson
2015-11-04 23:55     ` Heiko Stuebner [this message]
2015-11-04 23:55       ` Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 21:44 ` [PATCH 3/8] phy: rockchip-usb: move per-phy init into a separate function Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 21:44   ` Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 23:53   ` Doug Anderson
2015-11-04 23:53     ` Doug Anderson
2015-11-04 21:44 ` [PATCH 5/8] clk: rockchip: fix usbphy-related clocks Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 21:44   ` Heiko Stuebner
     [not found]   ` <1446673454-9529-6-git-send-email-heiko-4mtYJXux2i+zQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org>
2015-12-05  0:07     ` Michael Turquette
2015-12-05  0:07       ` Michael Turquette
2015-12-05  0:07       ` Michael Turquette
2015-12-05 10:12       ` Heiko Stübner
2015-12-05 10:12         ` Heiko Stübner
2015-11-04 21:44 ` [PATCH 6/8] ARM: dts: rockchip: add clock-cells for usb phy nodes Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 21:44   ` Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 21:44   ` Heiko Stuebner
2015-12-05  0:07   ` Michael Turquette
2015-12-05  0:07     ` Michael Turquette
2015-12-05  0:07     ` Michael Turquette
     [not found] ` <1446673454-9529-1-git-send-email-heiko-4mtYJXux2i+zQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org>
2015-11-04 21:44   ` [PATCH 4/8] phy: rockchip-usb: expose the phy-internal PLLs Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 21:44     ` Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 21:44     ` Heiko Stuebner
     [not found]     ` <1446673454-9529-5-git-send-email-heiko-4mtYJXux2i+zQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org>
2015-11-13  8:48       ` Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2015-11-13  8:48         ` Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2015-11-13  8:48         ` Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2015-11-04 21:44   ` [PATCH 7/8] ARM: dts: rockchip: assign usbphy480m_src to the new usbphy pll on veyron Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 21:44     ` Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 21:44     ` Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 21:44 ` [PATCH 8/8] phy: rockchip-usb: add handler for usb-uart functionality Heiko Stuebner
2015-11-04 21:44   ` Heiko Stuebner

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=6210861.uglufxBnXQ@phil \
    --to=heiko@sntech.de \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --cc=dianders@chromium.org \
    --cc=kishon@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \
    --cc=romain.perier@gmail.com \
    --cc=sboyd@codeaurora.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.