Re: [PATCH 00/24] ARM: OMAP2+: Adapt to ehci-omap changes for 3.10

Roger Quadros
2013-03-13T16:36:21Z

On 03/13/2013 06:24 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com> [130313 06:46]:
>> On 03/12/2013 06:40 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
>>> * Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com> [130312 04:47]:
>>>> Hi Tony,
>>>>
>>>> These patches provide the SoC side code required to support
>>>> the changes in the OMAP USB Host drivers done in [1], [2] & [3].
>>> ...
>>>
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-3430sdp.c | 97 +++++++++++++++-
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-3630sdp.c | 100 +++++++++++++++-
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-am3517crane.c | 95 +++++++++++++--
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-am3517evm.c | 66 ++++++++++-
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-cm-t35.c | 95 ++++++++++++++-
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-cm-t3517.c | 97 +++++++++++++++-
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-devkit8000.c | 20 ++--
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-generic.c | 67 +++++++++++
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-igep0020.c | 112 ++++++++++++++++---
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap3beagle.c | 93 +++++++++++++--
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap3evm.c | 62 ++++++++--
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap3pandora.c | 52 +++++++--
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap3stalker.c | 52 +++++++-
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap3touchbook.c | 62 +++++++++-
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-omap4panda.c | 122 ++++++++++++++------
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-overo.c | 54 ++++++++-
>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-zoom.c | 56 ++++++++-
>>>
>>> Can't you have some mach-omap2/ehci-common.c that takes care
>>> of the initializiation to avoid this much addition to the
>>> board-*.c files? You may be able to have just a common function
>>> to do it and pass few parameters?
>>
>> Since we moved reset and power handling for the USB PHYs from omap-echi
>> driver into the USB PHY driver we need to define the regulator data
>> for RESET and Power line of each PHY. So most of the code added is just
>> regulator data for the PHY rather than omap-ehci.
>
> It seems that you're now repeating minor variations of the same PHY
> over and over again though.

Yes it is the vcc and reset regulator data for the PHY that
is getting repeated with variations in the GPIO number.

>
>> Instead of a common function, I can implement some macros that make it
>> easier to define the regulators for the PHY in the board files.
>> Does this sound OK?
>>
>> Personally I don't like such macros because it hides the implementation
>> and is difficult to read/debug.
>
> I'd prefer a common function to initialize the PHY though as it sounds
> like using macros would just allocate similar PHY many times which seems
> unnecessary.
>
OK, so we want to create the regulator data at runtime to save some memory?
I'll come up with something.

cheers,
-roger