On 20/04/15 15:35, Mathias Nyman wrote: > Hi > > On 02.04.2015 15:23, Roger Quadros wrote: >> As xhci_hcd is now allocated by usb_create_hcd(), we don't >> need to add the primary HCD before creating the shared HCD. >> >> Creating the shared HCD before adding the primary HCD is particularly >> useful for the OTG use case so that we know at the OTG core if >> the HCD is in single configuration or dual (primary + shared) >> configuration. >> > > This doesn't apply as > > commit 7b8ef22ea547b80475ac7feab06fb15e0fc143d8 > usb: xhci: plat: Add USB phy support > > changed xhci-plat.c since. > > I rebased it, and the changed version is sitting in the for-usb-next branch in: > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mnyman/xhci.git > > But it appeared to me that usb_add_hcd() and usb_remove_hcd() will also > call phy init and remove functions. As the order how hcds are created and added > would change I'd need some more eyes on this to see if it will cause regression. > > Or maybe in the best case we could get rid of the "Add USB phy support" patch as > we will call xhci_add_hcd() for the first hcd much later, and it could maybe init > the phy for us? I thought usb_phy_*() stuff would be deprecated and we should use phy framework instead i.e. phy_init() and friends. In fact usb_add_hcd() is already handling the phy for us. So I'm in favor of getting rid of commit 7b8ef22ea547b80475ac7feab06fb15e0fc143d8 (usb: xhci: plat: Add USB phy support) cheers, -roger -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
