On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 10:53 PM, Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 08/09/16 21:42, Kevin Hilman wrote: >> >> Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> On 08/09/16 20:52, Martin Blumenstingl wrote: >>>> >>>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:35 PM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> + phy = devm_phy_create(&pdev->dev, NULL, &phy_meson_usb2_ops); >>>>>> + if (IS_ERR(phy)) { >>>>>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to create PHY\n"); >>>>>> + return PTR_ERR(phy); >>>>>> + } >>>>>> + >>>>>> + if (usb_reset_refcnt++ == 0) { >>>>>> + ret = device_reset(&pdev->dev); >>>>>> + if (ret) { >>>>>> + dev_err(&phy->dev, "Failed to reset USB PHY\n"); >>>>>> + return ret; >>>>>> + } >>>>>> + } >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The ref count + reset here looks like something that could/should be >>>>> handled in a runtime PM callback. >>>> >>>> Unfortunately that doesn't work (as Jerome found out) because both >>>> PHYs are sharing the same reset line. >>>> So if the second PHY would call device_reset then it would also reset >>>> the first PHY! >>>> >>>> There's a comment above the declaration of usb_reset_refcnt which >>>> tries to explain this: >>>> "The PHYs are sharing a common reset line -> we are only allowed to >>>> reset once for all PHYs." >>>> Maybe I should move this comment to the "if (usb_reset_refcnt++ == 0) >>>> {" line to make it easier to see? >>>> >>> >>> pm-runtime has refcounting in it. When one of the nodes turns on, >>> the pm-runtime will call your driver to say there is a user when >>> this first use turns up. >>> >>> If all the sub-phys turn off and drop their refcount then the driver >>> is called to say there are no more users and you can go to sleep. >> >> >> After a chat w/Martin on IRC, It turns out runtime PM wont help here. >> >> The reason is because there are physically two PHY devices[1]. Those 2 >> devices will be treated independely by runtime PM, and have separate >> use-counting, which means doing what I proposed would cause a reset to >> happen when either device was probed. >> >> So, I think it's OK as it is. > > > Surely you can do pm_runtime_get/put on the phy's parent platform > device and do it that way? could you please be more specific with that (do you mean pdev->dev.parent)? so we would use pm_runtime_{get_sync,put} with the parent, while we would still define the runtime_resume in our driver. I'd be happy if that works and we can remove that refcounting hack -- 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