From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: b-liu@ti.com (Bin Liu) Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2016 08:12:13 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 1/4] USB: Fix of_usb_get_dr_mode_by_phy with a shared phy block In-Reply-To: References: <1464888666-17728-1-git-send-email-hdegoede@redhat.com> <575167EC.8000504@ti.com> Message-ID: <20160603131213.GB3778@uda0271908> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi, On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 01:39:26PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 03-06-16 13:20, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: > >Hi, > > > >On Thursday 02 June 2016 11:01 PM, Hans de Goede wrote: > >>Some SoCs have a single phy-hw-block with multiple phys, this is > >>modelled by a single phy dts node, so we end up with multiple > >>controller nodes with a phys property pointing to the phy-node > >>of the otg-phy. > > > >Maybe we should try to model each phy with a separate dt node? > > That seems like making things unnecessarily complicated. If we want > to be 100% sure that of_usb_get_dr_mode_by_phy finds the right I believe we have to. > controller, we could add an "int index" parameter to of_usb_get_dr_mode_by_phy > and make it check that first argument specified to the phandle > used in the controller node matches the passed in index. Why we need the 'index'? Once the dt has seperate nodes for the phys, 'phy_np' passed in is the uniqe id of the phy node. > > And use index == -1 to skip this test. > > Regards, > > Hans Regards, -Bin.