On Wed, 2021-06-30 at 13:25 +0000, Biju Das wrote:
[...]
> > What else does it control? Are we missing any functionality that would
> > have to be added later?
>
> It has other controls like direct power down, clock control and connection control to
> handle the cases, when USB interface is not used permanently(like when port1 and port2 unused permanently)
>
> In future, if there is a case like below(for eg:- )
> 1) when port1 and port2 unused permanently ( This case recommends HW mod as well)
> 2) when either port1 or port2 unused permanently( This case recommends, from HW point not to supply the power to unused port)
>
> May be we could expose these properties in dt and probe time set the required control, if there is a requirement to support
> this cases in future.
Ok, thanks. If that's board design specific static configuration, I see
no issue.
[...]
> > > + if ((val & 0xff) == (PHY_RESET_PORT1 | PHY_RESET_PORT2))
> > ^^^^
> > What is the significance of the magic 0xff?
>
> We should use (PHY_RESET_PORT1 | PHY_RESET_PORT2) instead.
>
> Basically it is checking both ports are in reset state or not?
That would be better. Right now it's checking that bits 2, 3, 6, and 7
are cleared, and I couldn't tell whether that was by accident or on
purpose.
[...]
> > > +static void rzg2l_usbphy_ctrl_release_reset(struct reset_controller_dev
> > *rcdev,
> > > + unsigned long id)
> > > +{
> > > + struct rzg2l_usbphy_ctrl_priv *priv = rcdev_to_priv(rcdev);
> > > + void __iomem *base = priv->base;
> > > + u32 val = readl(base + RESET);
> > > +
> > > + val |= SEL_PLLRESET;
> > > + val &= ~(PLL_RESET | (id ? PHY_RESET_PORT2 : PHY_RESET_PORT1));
> > > + writel(val, base + RESET);
It would be good to protect the RESET register read-modify-writes with a
spinlock, same in the _set_reset() function.
regards
Philipp
