On 05/05/2016 09:52 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> Hello Krzysztof,
>
> On 05/05/2016 08:34 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> Some USB devices on embedded boards have external power supply which has
>> to be reset in certain conditions. Add pwrseq interface for this.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/power/pwrseq/pwrseq.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> include/linux/pwrseq.h | 8 ++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 52 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/power/pwrseq/pwrseq.c b/drivers/power/pwrseq/pwrseq.c
>> index 495a19d3c30b..306265f55a10 100644
>> --- a/drivers/power/pwrseq/pwrseq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/power/pwrseq/pwrseq.c
>> @@ -52,6 +52,43 @@ int mmc_pwrseq_alloc(struct mmc_host *host)
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mmc_pwrseq_alloc);
>>
>> +struct pwrseq *pwrseq_alloc(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>
> This function is USB specific so better to call it usb_pwrseq_alloc() instead.
Indeed it is parsing USB specific bindings so such prefix is needed.
> Although, this function has a lot of duplicated code from mmc_pwrseq_alloc()
> so I think is better to keep the name generic and factorize the common code.
>
> I expect other devices are also needing some kind of power seq in the future
> so having a single alloc function instead of each for device type makes sense.
Yes, this can be cleaned up and unified.
>
>> + struct device_node *np;
>> + struct pwrseq *p, *ret = NULL;
>> +
>> + np = of_parse_phandle(dev->of_node, "usb-pwrseq", 0);
>
> I know this is just an RFC but you should really add DT bindings for this.
Yep, next step.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
