On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 4:35 PM, Stephen Boyd <stephen.boyd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The qcom HSIC ULPI phy doesn't have any bits set in the vendor or
> product ID registers. This makes it impossible to make a ULPI
> driver match against the ID registers. Add support to discover
> the ULPI phys via DT help alleviate this problem. In the DT case,
> we'll look for a ULPI bus node underneath the device registering
> the ULPI viewport (or the parent of that device to support
> chipidea's device layout) and then match up the phy node
> underneath that with the ULPI device that's created.
>
> The side benefit of this is that we can use standard properties
> in the phy node like clks, regulators, gpios, etc. because we
> don't have firmware like ACPI to turn these things on for us. And
> we can use the DT phy binding to point our phy consumer to the
> phy provider.
>
> The ULPI bus code supports native enumeration by reading the
> vendor ID and product ID registers at device creation time, but
> we can't be certain that those register reads will succeed if the
> phy is not powered up. To avoid any problems with reading the ID
> registers before the phy is powered we fallback to DT matching
> when the ID reads fail.
>
> If the ULPI spec had some generic power sequencing for these
> registers we could put that into the ULPI bus layer and power up
> the device before reading the ID registers. Unfortunately this
> doesn't exist and the power sequence is usually device specific.
> By having the device matched up with DT we can avoid this
> problem.
>
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: <devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <stephen.boyd@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/ulpi.txt | 20 +++++++
> drivers/usb/common/ulpi.c | 77 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 2 files changed, 92 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/ulpi.txt
Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
But one concern below.
> -static int ulpi_register(struct device *dev, struct ulpi *ulpi)
> +static int ulpi_of_register(struct ulpi *ulpi)
> +{
> + struct device_node *np = NULL, *child;
> +
> + /* Find a ulpi bus underneath the parent or the parent of the parent */
parent of the parent is called the grandparent.
> + if (ulpi->dev.parent->of_node)
> + np = of_find_node_by_name(ulpi->dev.parent->of_node, "ulpi");
> + else if (ulpi->dev.parent->parent && ulpi->dev.parent->parent->of_node)
> + np = of_find_node_by_name(ulpi->dev.parent->parent->of_node,
First setting "parent = ulpi->dev.parent" would make this a bit easier
on the eyes.
When is it valid to be the grandparent? The binding doesn't mention that.
Rob
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
