Hi Balbi, On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 11:52 AM, Vivek Gautam <gautamvivek1987@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi Kishon, > > > On Fri, Feb 1, 2013 at 10:51 AM, kishon <kishon@xxxxxx> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> >> On Thursday 31 January 2013 09:08 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 09:00:37PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi Felipe, >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Felipe Balbi <balbi@xxxxxx> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 08:53:27PM +0530, Vivek Gautam wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Moreover, SoCs having multiple dwc3 controllers will have multiple >>>>>>>> PHYs, which eventually be added using usb_add_phy_dev(), and not >>>>>>>> using usb_add_phy(). So each dwc3 controller won't be able to >>>>>>>> get PHYs by simply calling devm_usb_get_phy() also. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No. We have added usb_get_phy_dev() for that purpose in the case of >>>>>>> non-dt. >>>>>>> I think, instead you can have a patch to use devm_usb_get_phy_dev() >>>>>>> here and >>>>>>> in exynos platform specific code use usb_bind_phy() to bind the phy >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> controller till you change it to dt. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> We have dt support for dwc3-exynos, in such case we should go ahead >>>>>> with >>>>>> of_platform_populate(), right ? >>>>>> But if when i use of_platform_populate() i will not be able to set >>>>>> dma_mask to dwc3->dev. :-( >> >> >> You can do something like this >> >> static u64 dwc3_exynos_dma_mask = DMA_BIT_MASK(32); >> >> static int dwc3_exynos_set_dmamask(struct device *dev, void *c) >> { >> dev->dma_mask = &dwc3_exynos_dma_mask; >> >> return 0; >> } >> >> And in your probe after of_platform_populate, you can add >> >> device_for_each_child(&pdev->dev, NULL, dwc3_exynos_set_dmamask); >> >> Here pdev is the platform device of dwc3-exynos. By this way all the >> children of dwc3-exynos will have dma_mask set to the required value. >> > > Nice idea, thanks :-) > hmm.. so i can patch this now, and get things working ;-) > If this is fine with you shall i go ahead and post a patch for the same ? ;-) >> I'm not sure if there is any other better way to achieve the same (without >> patching of.c ;-)) >> > -- Thanks & Regards Vivek -- 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