From: balbi@ti.com (Felipe Balbi)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] arm: omap: remove *.auto* from device names given in usb_bind_phy
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 09:28:44 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130730062844.GH9155@radagast> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51F75C40.4060406@ti.com>
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:55:04AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:41:23AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> >>>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-2430sdp.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-2430sdp.c
> >>>>>>>> index 244d8a5..17bb076 100644
> >>>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-2430sdp.c
> >>>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-2430sdp.c
> >>>>>>>> @@ -233,7 +233,7 @@ static void __init omap_2430sdp_init(void)
> >>>>>>>> omap_hsmmc_init(mmc);
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> omap_mux_init_signal("usb0hs_stp", OMAP_PULL_ENA | OMAP_PULL_UP);
> >>>>>>>> - usb_bind_phy("musb-hdrc.0.auto", 0, "twl4030_usb");
> >>>>>>>> + usb_bind_phy("musb-hdrc.0", 0, "twl4030_usb");
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> how about moving usb_bind_phy() calls to omap2430.c ?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c b/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
> >>>>>>> index f44e8b5..b6abc1a 100644
> >>>>>>> --- a/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
> >>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/musb/omap2430.c
> >>>>>>> @@ -544,6 +544,9 @@ static int omap2430_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> pdata->board_data = data;
> >>>>>>> pdata->config = config;
> >>>>>>> + } else {
> >>>>>>> + /* bind the PHY */
> >>>>>>> + usb_bind_phy(dev_name(&musb->dev), 0, "twl4030_usb");
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> This looks like a hack IMHO to workaround the usb phy library. otherwise it is
> >>>>>> similar to get_phy_by_name.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> actually, this is a workaround to the fact that we're not creating all
> >>>>> platform_devices in arch/arm/mach-omap2/ :-)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If we had the musb allocation there, we could easily handle
> >>>>> usb_bind_phy()
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>> so that's temporary. It might be better than to reintroduce the IDR in
> >>>>>>> musb_core.c.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> that?s needed for generic phy framework anyway :-s
> >>>>>
> >>>>> right, but generic phy framework can handle everything just fine, the
> >>>>> only problem is that names are changing.
> >>>>
> >>>> right. But if the names change, PHY framework wouldn't be able to return the
> >>>> reference to the PHY.
> >>>
> >>> with my suggestion they can change whenever they want since we're using
> >>> dev_name() of the just-created musb platform_device. Right ?
> >>
> >> right. But the PHY device can be created in a different place from where the
> >> musb devices are created. And in the PHY framework, the PHY device should have
> >
> > this shouldn't be a problem. As long as the phy is created, all should
> > be good.
> >
> >> the list of controller device (names) it can support (PHY framework does not
> >> maintain a separate list for binding like how we had in USB PHY library). e.g.
> >> http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-omap at vger.kernel.org/msg92817.html. In such
> >
> > this has nothing to do with $subject though. We talk about generic PHY
> > framework once all these PHY drivers are moved there :-)
> >
> >> cases how do we pass the device names. Also will the MUSB core device be
> >> created before twl4030-usb PHY device?
> >
> > and why would that be a problem ? We're telling the framework that the
> > musb device will use a phy with a name of 'twl4030'. If musb calls
> > usb_get_phy_dev() and doesn't find a phy, it'll return -EPROBE_DEFER and
> > try again later.
>
> I think we are talking about different problems here ;-) I'm trying to tell
> using idr in MUSB core is needed for Generic PHY Framework. So in a way, the
> Generic PHY Framework series depends on this patch series or else MUSB in OMAP3
> platforms wont work after Generic PHY framework gets merged.
then you just found a limitation in your framework, right ? :-) I mean,
imagine if now we have to add an IDR to every single user of your
framework because they could end up in systems with multiple instances
of the same IP ?
Now consider that you aim to have your framework be used by Network,
USB, SATA, Graphics, etc... Have you really only considered DT
platforms ? DT is quite easy since you can require folks to pass the
proper phandle, but drivers will want to use PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO and
your framework needs to cope with that.
--
balbi
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20130730/6d076c74/attachment.sig>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-07-30 6:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-07-26 9:03 [PATCH 0/2] usb: fix controller-PHY binding for OMAP3 platform Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2013-07-26 9:03 ` [PATCH 1/2] usb: musb: omap: remove using PLATFORM_DEVID_AUTO in omap2430.c Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2013-07-26 9:03 ` [PATCH 2/2] arm: omap: remove *.auto* from device names given in usb_bind_phy Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2013-07-29 15:06 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-07-29 15:29 ` Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2013-07-29 17:54 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-07-30 5:14 ` Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2013-07-30 6:01 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-07-30 6:11 ` Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2013-07-30 6:18 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-07-30 6:25 ` Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2013-07-30 6:28 ` Felipe Balbi [this message]
2013-07-30 6:46 ` Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2013-07-30 7:16 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-07-30 8:11 ` Kishon Vijay Abraham I
2013-07-30 8:15 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-07-30 14:25 ` Greg KH
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=20130730062844.GH9155@radagast \
--to=balbi@ti.com \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).