Re: [PATCHv3] usb: musb: Fix unbalanced platform_disable

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



* Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> [160915 07:00]:
> Hi,
> 
> On 14-09-16 20:10, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > Commit a83e17d0f73b ("usb: musb: Improve PM runtime and phy handling
> > for 2430 glue layer") moved PHY enable/disable calls to happen from
> > omap2430_musb_enable/disable(). That broke enumeration for several
> > devices as PM runtime in the PHY will never enable it.
> > 
> > The root cause of the problem is unpaired calls from musb_core.c to
> > musb_platform_enable/disable in musb_core.c as reported by
> > Andreas Kemnade <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxxx>.
> > 
> > As musb_platform_enable/disable are being called from various functions,
> > let's not attempt to make them paiered immediately. This would require
> > fixing all the callers like musb_remove.
> 
> Yeah, the sunxi glue actually has:
> 
> static void sunxi_musb_enable(struct musb *musb)
> {
>         struct sunxi_glue *glue = dev_get_drvdata(musb->controller->parent);
> 
>         glue->musb = musb;
> 
>         /* musb_core does not call us in a balanced manner */
>         if (test_and_set_bit(SUNXI_MUSB_FL_ENABLED, &glue->flags))
>                 return;

Heh we're trying to get to the "balanced manner" point hopefully soon :)

>         schedule_work(&glue->work);
> }
> 
> static void sunxi_musb_disable(struct musb *musb)
> {
>         struct sunxi_glue *glue = dev_get_drvdata(musb->controller->parent);
> 
>         clear_bit(SUNXI_MUSB_FL_ENABLED, &glue->flags);
> }
> 
> Note that since the glue struct is kzalloc-ed, this makes calling
> sunxi_musb_disable() from sunxi_musb_init() a nop, so if this
> needs a respin please drop the sunxi changes, they are not
> necessary.

Hmm we have sunxi_musb_probe() do platform_device_register_full(),
then musb_probe() happens, and calls musb_init_controller().

In musb_init_controller() we do musb_platform_init() that finally
calls sunxi_musb_init().

So the sunxi glue is kzalloc'ed and initialized already in
sunxi_musb_probe(), and musb parts are already initialized in
musb_init_controller().

I don't quite follow what you mean how it's a nop.. Care to
clarify that a bit? Maybe you're thinking we're calling it from
sunxi_musb_probe() instead?

Anyways, calling sunxi_musb_disable() seems unnecessary from
sunxi_musb_init() because it does reset_control_deassert().
But that can be cleaned up later on if no other reasons for
changes for v4.8-rc cycle.

Regards,

Tony
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Arm (vger)]     [ARM Kernel]     [ARM MSM]     [Linux Tegra]     [Linux WPAN Networking]     [Linux Wireless Networking]     [Maemo Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux