On 5/23/2022 9:40 PM, Brian Masney wrote:
On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 06:04:55PM +0530, Harsh Agarwal wrote:
- dwc->usb3_generic_phy = devm_phy_get(dev, "usb3-phy");
- if (IS_ERR(dwc->usb3_generic_phy)) {
- ret = PTR_ERR(dwc->usb3_generic_phy);
- if (ret == -ENOSYS || ret == -ENODEV)
- dwc->usb3_generic_phy = NULL;
- else
- return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "no usb3 phy configured\n");
+ if (IS_ERR(dwc->usb2_phy[0])) {
+ ret = PTR_ERR(dwc->usb2_phy[0]);
+ if (ret == -ENXIO || ret == -ENODEV)
+ dwc->usb2_phy[0] = NULL;
+ else
+ return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "no usb2 phy configured\n");
+ }
+
+ if (IS_ERR(dwc->usb3_phy[0])) {
+ ret = PTR_ERR(dwc->usb3_phy[0]);
+ if (ret == -ENXIO || ret == -ENODEV)
+ dwc->usb3_phy[0] = NULL;
+ else
+ return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "no usb3 phy configured\n");
+ }
+
+ dwc->usb2_generic_phy = devm_phy_get(dev, "usb2-phy");
+ if (IS_ERR(dwc->usb2_generic_phy)) {
+ ret = PTR_ERR(dwc->usb2_generic_phy);
+ if (ret == -ENOSYS || ret == -ENODEV)
+ dwc->usb2_generic_phy = NULL;
+ else
+ return dev_err_probe(dev, ret, "no usb2 phy configured\n");
+ }
I know that this block is a copy and paste move from above, but is the
ENOSYS check really needed? It looks like the phy_get() only returns
-ENODEV.
sure I got ENOSYS removed in my RFC V2 patch. This was present by
default, so I did not change it earlier.
@@ -1147,8 +1149,10 @@ struct dwc3 {
struct reset_control *reset;
- struct usb_phy *usb2_phy;
- struct usb_phy *usb3_phy;
+ struct usb_phy **usb2_phy;
+ struct usb_phy **usb3_phy;
+ u32 num_hsphy;
+ u32 num_ssphy;
Rename num_hsphy / num_ssphy to num_usb2_phy and num_usb3_phy so this is
easier to audit.
Okay will change this in my next Patch.
Brian
