On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 05:32:23PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > Hi Bin, > > On Tuesday 13 Sep 2016 09:14:48 Bin Liu wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 08:18:05PM -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > * Bin Liu <b-liu@xxxxxx> [160912 11:36]: > > > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 08:05:30PM +0200, Andreas Kemnade wrote: > > > > > Hmm, then the question is: Couldn't the X_musb_disable simply be > > > > > called > > > > > from X_probe if needed to be an the safe side? > > > > > > > > In general, we try not to do so if all possible. We want to put common > > > > code in the core, not repleat them in glue layers. > > > > > > > > In this specific case, we cannot do it. For example in dsps glue, the > > > > musb reset is done in dsps_musb_init(), so no place in dsps_probe() to > > > > call dsps_musb_disable(). > > > > > > OK yeah if we need to do something, then disabling the irq in > > > musb_core.c until we're done should be enough. > > > > I don't think we can disable it in musb core directly. *_musb_disable() > > in glue layers disables the musb wrapper's irq, not the core's irq. > > > > But I guess we can let *_musb_init() directly calls *_musb_disable() in > > the glue drivers right after musb reset. This would have to touch almost > > all glue drivers, but trivial change. Thoughts? > > Is there any use case for starting a glue layer with interrupts enabled ? If I cannot think of any, at least in the current musb drivers. > not I agree that all glue layers should do so in *_musb_init(). Probably not > by calling *_musb_disable() directly though, as that would reintroduce the > unbalanced PHY power control problem. Not a problem, such change will be done in each glue driver, so we don't do it for omap2430 glue. Regards, -Bin. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
