From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Benoit Cousson Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] USB: dwc3-exynos: Add support for device tree Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 13:44:38 +0200 Message-ID: <508A77A6.3080402@ti.com> References: <1350377157-28465-1-git-send-email-gautam.vivek@samsung.com> <1350377157-28465-2-git-send-email-gautam.vivek@samsung.com> <20121016095333.GD5548@arwen.pp.htv.fi> <507D31B3.40707@ti.com> <20121016100838.GC17416@arwen.pp.htv.fi> <20121026081344.GC23501@arwen.pp.htv.fi> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20121026081344.GC23501@arwen.pp.htv.fi> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org To: balbi@ti.com Cc: Vivek Gautam , rob.herring@calxeda.com, kishon , av.tikhomirov@samsung.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, Vivek Gautam , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org Hi Felipe, On 10/26/2012 10:13 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 11:37:33AM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 03:36:43PM +0530, kishon wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On Tuesday 16 October 2012 03:23 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: >>>>> On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 02:15:56PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote: >>>>>> This patch adds support to parse probe data for >>>>>> dwc3-exynos driver using device tree. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam >>>>>> --- >>>>>> drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ >>>>>> 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c >>>>>> index ca65978..d11ef49 100644 >>>>>> --- a/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c >>>>>> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ >>>>>> #include >>>>>> #include >>>>>> #include >>>>>> +#include >>>>>> >>>>>> #include "core.h" >>>>>> >>>>>> @@ -87,6 +88,8 @@ err1: >>>>>> return ret; >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> +static u64 dwc3_exynos_dma_mask = DMA_BIT_MASK(32); >>>>>> + >>>>>> static int __devinit dwc3_exynos_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>>>>> { >>>>>> struct dwc3_exynos_data *pdata = pdev->dev.platform_data; >>>>>> @@ -103,6 +106,14 @@ static int __devinit dwc3_exynos_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>>>>> goto err0; >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> + /* >>>>>> + * Right now device-tree probed devices don't get dma_mask set. >>>>>> + * Since shared usb code relies on it, set it here for now. >>>>>> + * Once we move to full device tree support this will vanish off. >>>>>> + */ >>>>>> + if (!pdev->dev.dma_mask) >>>>>> + pdev->dev.dma_mask = &dwc3_exynos_dma_mask; >>>>> >>>>> says who ? >>>>> >>>>> $ git grep -e dma_mask drivers/of/ >>>>> drivers/of/platform.c: dev->dev.dma_mask = &dev->archdata.dma_mask; >>>>> drivers/of/platform.c: dev->archdata.dma_mask = 0xffffffffUL; >>>>> drivers/of/platform.c: dev->dev.coherent_dma_mask = DMA_BIT_MASK(32); >>>>> drivers/of/platform.c: dev->dev.coherent_dma_mask = ~0; >>>>> drivers/of/platform.c: dev->dma_mask = ~0; >>>>> >>>>> -ECONFUSED >>>> >>>> dma_mask is set under some ifdef except for "dev->dma_mask = ~0;". >>>> However I agree with you for coherent_dma_mask case. >>> >>> indeed. Should we try to patch that instead ? >>> >>> Rob, should we set dma_mask at the driver or do you have a nicer way to >>> handle it ?? >>> >> Can i have suggestions here please ? :) > > Benoit, can you answer here since nobody else does ? Well, I wish I could, but honestly I don't have a clue :-( Benoit