Hi Guenter & Heiko,
On 2016/6/15 23:47, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 6:14 PM, Frank Wang <frank.wang at rock-chips.com> wrote:
>> Hi Heiko & Guenter,
>>
>>
>> On 2016/6/14 22:00, Heiko St?bner wrote:
>>> Am Dienstag, 14. Juni 2016, 06:50:31 schrieb Guenter Roeck:
>>>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 6:27 AM, Heiko St?bner <heiko at sntech.de> wrote:
>>>>> Am Montag, 13. Juni 2016, 10:10:10 schrieb Frank Wang:
>>>>>> The newer SoCs (rk3366, rk3399) take a different usb-phy IP block
>>>>>> than rk3288 and before, and most of phy-related registers are also
>>>>>> different from the past, so a new phy driver is required necessarily.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Frank Wang <frank.wang at rock-chips.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>>>> +static int rockchip_usb2phy_init(struct phy *phy)
>>>>>> +{
>>>>>> + struct rockchip_usb2phy_port *rport = phy_get_drvdata(phy);
>>>>>> + struct rockchip_usb2phy *rphy = dev_get_drvdata(phy->dev.parent);
>>>>>> + int ret;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>>
>>>>> if (!rport->port_cfg)
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>>
>>>>> Otherwise the currently empty otg-port will cause null-pointer
>>>>> dereferences
>>>>> when it gets assigned in the devicetree already.
>>>> Not really, at least not here - that port should not have port_id set
>>>> to USB2PHY_PORT_HOST.
>>>>
>>>> Does it even make sense to instantiate the otg port ? Is it going to
>>>> do anything without port configuration ?
>>> Ok, that would be the other option - not creating the phy in the driver.
>>
>> Well, I will put this conditional inside *_host_port_init(), if it is an
>> empty, the phy-device should not be created.
>> Something like the following:
>>
>> --- a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-inno-usb2.c
>> +++ b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-inno-usb2.c
>> @@ -483,9 +483,13 @@ static int rockchip_usb2phy_host_port_init(struct
>> rockchip_usb2phy *rphy,
>> {
>> int ret;
>>
>> - rport->port_id = USB2PHY_PORT_HOST;
>> rport->port_cfg = &rphy->phy_cfg->port_cfgs[USB2PHY_PORT_HOST];
>> + if (!rport->port_cfg) {
>> + dev_err(rphy->dev, "no host port-config provided.\n");
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
> This would never be NULL. At issue is that you don't assign port_cfg
> if the port is _not_ a host port.
Sorry, I made a mistake. How about something like the following:
@@ -574,6 +579,15 @@ static int rockchip_usb2phy_probe(struct
platform_device *pdev)
struct rockchip_usb2phy_port *rport = &rphy->ports[index];
struct phy *phy;
+ /*
+ * This driver aim to support both otg-port and host-port,
+ * but unfortunately, the otg part is not ready in current,
+ * so this comments and below codes are interim, which
should
+ * be removed after otg-port is supplied soon.
+ */
+ if (of_node_cmp(child_np->name, "host-port"))
+ goto next_child;
+
phy = devm_phy_create(dev, child_np,
&rockchip_usb2phy_ops);
if (IS_ERR(phy)) {
dev_err(dev, "failed to create phy\n");
@@ -582,17 +596,13 @@ static int rockchip_usb2phy_probe(struct
platform_device *pdev)
}
rport->phy = phy;
-
- /* initialize otg/host port separately */
- if (!of_node_cmp(child_np->name, "host-port")) {
- ret = rockchip_usb2phy_host_port_init(rphy, rport,
- child_np);
- if (ret)
- goto put_child;
- }
-
phy_set_drvdata(rport->phy, rport);
+ ret = rockchip_usb2phy_host_port_init(rphy, rport,
child_np);
+ if (ret)
+ goto put_child;
+
+next_child:
/* to prevent out of boundary */
if (++index >= rphy->phy_cfg->num_ports)
break;
BR.
Frank
