Am Mittwoch, 4. November 2015, 15:46:04 schrieb Doug Anderson:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Heiko Stuebner <heiko at sntech.de> wrote:
> > This introduces a common struct that holds data belonging to
> > the umbrella device that contains all the phys and that we
> > want to use later.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko at sntech.de>
> > ---
> > drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++-------
> > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c
> > index dfc056b..dda1994 100644
> > --- a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c
> > +++ b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c
> > @@ -36,9 +36,14 @@
> > #define SIDDQ_ON BIT(13)
> > #define SIDDQ_OFF (0 << 13)
> >
> > +struct rockchip_usb_phy_base {
> > + struct device *dev;
> > + struct regmap *reg_base;
> > +};
> > +
> > struct rockchip_usb_phy {
> > + struct rockchip_usb_phy_base *base;
> > unsigned int reg_offset;
> > - struct regmap *reg_base;
> > struct clk *clk;
> > struct phy *phy;
> > };
> > @@ -46,7 +51,7 @@ struct rockchip_usb_phy {
> > static int rockchip_usb_phy_power(struct rockchip_usb_phy *phy,
> > bool siddq)
> > {
> > - return regmap_write(phy->reg_base, phy->reg_offset,
> > + return regmap_write(phy->base->reg_base, phy->reg_offset,
> > SIDDQ_WRITE_ENA | (siddq ? SIDDQ_ON : SIDDQ_OFF));
> > }
> >
> > @@ -101,17 +106,23 @@ static void rockchip_usb_phy_action(void *data)
> > static int rockchip_usb_phy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > {
> > struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > + struct rockchip_usb_phy_base *phy_base;
> > struct rockchip_usb_phy *rk_phy;
> > struct phy_provider *phy_provider;
> > struct device_node *child;
> > - struct regmap *grf;
> > unsigned int reg_offset;
> > int err;
> >
> > - grf = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(dev->of_node, "rockchip,grf");
> > - if (IS_ERR(grf)) {
> > + phy_base = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*phy_base), GFP_KERNEL);
> > + if (!phy_base)
> > + return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> > + phy_base->dev = dev;
> > + phy_base->reg_base = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(dev->of_node,
> > + "rockchip,grf");
> > + if (IS_ERR(phy_base->reg_base)) {
> > dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Missing rockchip,grf property\n");
> > - return PTR_ERR(grf);
> > + return PTR_ERR(phy_base->reg_base);
> > }
> >
> > for_each_available_child_of_node(dev->of_node, child) {
> > @@ -126,7 +137,6 @@ static int rockchip_usb_phy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > }
> >
> > rk_phy->reg_offset = reg_offset;
> > - rk_phy->reg_base = grf;
>
> I'm probably missing something, but I would have expected a line line:
>
> rk_phy->base = phy_base;
>
> Otherwise how does "base" get assigned? Ah, I see. You forgot it in
> this patch and then cheated and slipped it in in patch #3. ;) For
> nice bisectability it probably belongs here, too...
Thanks for that catch and yep, it should definitly be here too. While
I did a compile-test for the individual steps, I guess I did not do
runtime tests for each.
I guess this is what happens when you try to separate a final work into
separate steps :-) . I'll send a revised version hopefully tomorrow.
Heiko
