On 06/16/2016 07:09 PM, Frank Wang wrote:
The newer SoCs (rk3366, rk3399) take a different usb-phy IP block
than rk3288 and before, and most of phy-related registers are also
different from the past, so a new phy driver is required necessarily.
Signed-off-by: Frank Wang <frank.wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Suggested-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Suggested-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@xxxxxxxxx>
Tested-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@xxxxxxxxx>
---
[ ... ]
+
+static int rockchip_usb2phy_resume(struct phy *phy)
+{
+ struct rockchip_usb2phy_port *rport = phy_get_drvdata(phy);
+ struct rockchip_usb2phy *rphy = dev_get_drvdata(phy->dev.parent);
+ int ret;
+
+ dev_dbg(&rport->phy->dev, "port resume\n");
+
+ ret = clk_prepare_enable(rphy->clk480m);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
If suspend can be called multiple times, resume can be called
multiple times as well. Doesn't this cause a clock imbalance
if you call clk_prepare_enable() multiple times on resume,
but clk_disable_unprepare() only once on suspend ?
+ ret = property_enable(rphy, &rport->port_cfg->phy_sus, false);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ rport->suspended = false;
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int rockchip_usb2phy_suspend(struct phy *phy)
+{
+ struct rockchip_usb2phy_port *rport = phy_get_drvdata(phy);
+ struct rockchip_usb2phy *rphy = dev_get_drvdata(phy->dev.parent);
+ int ret;
+
+ dev_dbg(&rport->phy->dev, "port suspend\n");
+
+ if (rport->suspended)
+ goto exit;
+
I know I am nitpicking, but
return 0;
would be fine here, be more consistent with the rest of the code,
+ ret = property_enable(rphy, &rport->port_cfg->phy_sus, true);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+
+ rport->suspended = true;
+ clk_disable_unprepare(rphy->clk480m);
+
+exit:
+ return 0;
and this label is really unnecessary.
+}
+
[ ... ]
--
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
