From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Marek Vasut Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 00:58:36 +0100 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] usb: add clock support for generic EHCI In-Reply-To: References: <1452659641-17599-1-git-send-email-yamada.masahiro@socionext.com> <201601131544.05957.marex@denx.de> Message-ID: <201601140058.36922.marex@denx.de> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Wednesday, January 13, 2016 at 06:08:34 PM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > Hi Marek, Hi! > 2016-01-13 23:44 GMT+09:00 Marek Vasut : > >> static int ehci_usb_probe(struct udevice *dev) > >> { > >> > >> + struct generic_ehci *priv = dev_get_priv(dev); > >> > >> struct ehci_hccr *hccr = (struct ehci_hccr *)dev_get_addr(dev); > >> struct ehci_hcor *hcor; > >> > >> + int i; > >> + > >> + for (i = 0; i < EHCI_MAX_CLKS; i++) { > > > > Hi! > > > > Can't you dynamically figure out how many clock are in the clocks > > property and allocate the clk_ids array based on that ? This would > > remove the need for this EHCI_MAX_CLKS ad-hoc constant. > > It is possible, but costly. > > We have to know "#clock-cells" of each clock provider to do that. > Effectively, we have to call fdt_clk_get() until it fails > in order to get the number of the clocks. > > Then, needed memory is allocated. > > Again, we have to call fdt_clk_get(), > this time, in order to really get and store the clocks. > > I think this is why the Linux one also uses the fixed value for the array > size. > > See linux/drivers/usb/host/ehci-platform.c. OK, let's go with this. Thanks for explaining. > >> + priv->clk_ids[i] = fdt_clk_get(dev, i, > >> &priv->clk_devs[i]); > > > > Do you need to stort clk_devs in the priv structure at all ? > > Yes, if we call clock_disable() in the .remove callback. > No, if we do not do that. OK > >> + if (priv->clk_ids[i] < 0) > >> + break; > >> + if (clk_enable(priv->clk_devs[i], priv->clk_ids[i])) > > > > I think you should also disable the clock in ehci_usb_remove() {} . > > Generally speaking, disabling clocks is more difficult than enabling them > because we should have enable_count. > (For example, assume two clock consumers share one clock gate) > > Unlike Linux's clock framework, U-Boot's clock-uclass does not support > the enable_count. > > > Having said that, it makes sense to add clock_disable() in the .remove > callback. CCing Simon, let's see what he has to say. Best regards, Marek Vasut