Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] phy: ti: tusb1210: Don't check for write errors when powering on

[Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>]

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 01:23:21PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> On 6/13/22 18:08, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On some platforms, like Intel Merrifield, the writing values during power on
> > may timeout:
> > 
> >    tusb1210 dwc3.0.auto.ulpi: error -110 writing val 0x41 to reg 0x80
> >    phy phy-dwc3.0.auto.ulpi.0: phy poweron failed --> -110
> >    dwc3 dwc3.0.auto: error -ETIMEDOUT: failed to initialize core
> >    dwc3: probe of dwc3.0.auto failed with error -110
> > 
> > which effectively fails the probe of the USB controller.
> > Drop the check as it was before the culprit commit (see Fixes tag).
> > 
> > Fixes: 09a3512681b3 ("phy: ti: tusb1210: Improve ulpi_read()/_write() error checking")
> > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
> 
> Copy and pasting my reply about this in another thread to keep everyone up2date:

Thanks! My replies below.

> """
> In my experience with using the phy for charger-type detection on some
> x86 android tablets which don't have any other way to do charger detection,
> these errors indicate a real communication issue for reading/writing
> phy registers. At the same time this usually does not seem to be a big
> problem since the phy seems to work fine with its power-on defaults.
> 
> In case of Bay Trail these errors were related to 2 things:
> 
> 1. Autosuspend of the phy-interface block in the dwc3, fixed by:
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=d7c93a903f33ff35aa0e6b5a8032eb9755b00826
> 
> But dwc3_pci_mrfld_properties[] already sets "snps,dis_u2_susphy_quirk",
> so I guess it is not this.
> 
> 2. There being no delay in tusb1210_power_on() between toggling the
> reset IO and then trying to communicate with the phy, fixed in:
> 
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=df37c99815d9e0775e67276d70c93cbc25f31c70
> 
> Maybe the:
> 
> #define TUSB1210_RESET_TIME_MS				30

Actually it's 50.

> Added by that commit needs to be a bit bigger for the possibly
> older phy revision used on the merifield boards?
> 
> (note it is fine to just increase it a bit everywhere).
> """
> 
> IMHO it would be good to try and increase TUSB1210_RESET_TIME_MS (start with say 100
> and then see if e.g. 50 also works). If increasing that does not work

No help

[   35.126397] tusb1210 dwc3.0.auto.ulpi: GPIO lookup for consumer reset
[   35.126418] tusb1210 dwc3.0.auto.ulpi: using ACPI for GPIO lookup
[   35.126455] tusb1210 dwc3.0.auto.ulpi: using lookup tables for GPIO lookup
[   35.126465] tusb1210 dwc3.0.auto.ulpi: No GPIO consumer reset found
[   35.126476] tusb1210 dwc3.0.auto.ulpi: GPIO lookup for consumer cs
[   35.126485] tusb1210 dwc3.0.auto.ulpi: using ACPI for GPIO lookup
[   35.126538] tusb1210 dwc3.0.auto.ulpi: using lookup tables for GPIO lookup
[   35.126548] tusb1210 dwc3.0.auto.ulpi: No GPIO consumer cs found
[   40.534107] tusb1210 dwc3.0.auto.ulpi: error -110 writing val 0x41 to reg 0x80

(I put 5000 ms there to be sure)

> I'm fine with going with this workaround patch to fix things.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko