On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 11:48:05AM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > [...] > > >> > > >> > Unlike the MMC design, there is no dts entry to indicate whether this > >> > device needs pwrseq or not at this design, it will only carry out power > >> > on sequence after matching. So, return -EPROBE_DEFER may not work since > >> > this device may never need pwrseq. > >> > >> Then, how will you really be able to fetch the correct pwrseq library > >> instance for the device node? > >> > >> Suppose their is a *list* of pwrseq library instances available. In > >> pwrseq_find_available_instance() you call of_match_node(table, np). > >> The "table" there corresponds to the compatible for the pwrseq library > >> and the np is the device node provided by the caller of > >> of_pwrseq_on(). > >> > >> Why is this match done? > > > > The compatible in table is from the source code, and the compatible in > > np is from the dts. This is the current match way, I comment your > > suggestion below. > > > >> > >> Why can't the match be done before trying to fetch a library instance > > > > How? If there is no pwrseq instance, how can we do match? > > > >> and then in a second step, really try to fetch the instance? If only > >> the second step fails, returning -EPROBE_DEFER can be done, no? > >> > >> BTW, I didn't compatible for the generic pwrseq library being > >> documented in this series. > > Seems like you need to update the DT documentation for the below > compatible, which is used for the generic pwrseq library. Perhaps this > is what puzzles me a bit on *why* the match is done. > > +static const struct of_device_id generic_id_table[] = { > + { .compatible = "generic",}, > + { /* sentinel */ } > +}; Sorry, I should update this "generic" compatible at 1st binding-doc patch. > > [...] > > >> > > >> > This additional instance is used to store compatible information for > >> > this pwrseq library, it is used for the next matching between device > >> > and pwrseq library, it just likes we need the first pwrseq instance > >> > registered at boot stage. > >> > >> Why can't the compatible information be a static table, known by the > >> pwrseq core library? > >> > >> Then when of_pwrseq_on() is called, that static table is parsed and > >> matched, then a corresponding pwrseq library instance tries to be > >> fetched. > >> > > > > So, you suggest allocating and registering pwrseq instance on the > > demand? Eg, we maintain a power sequence static table, including > > compatible and allocate function. > > Yes, something like that. > > > > > static const struct pwrseq_match_table pwrseq_match_table_list[] = { > > { PWRSEQ_DEV(0x0204, 0x6025), .alloc_instance = pwrseq_AA_alloc_instance }, > > { PWRSEQ_DEV(0x0204, 0x6026), .alloc_instance = pwrseq_BB_alloc_instance }, > > { PWRSEQ_DEV(0xffff, 0xffff), .alloc_instance = pwrseq_generic_alloc_instance }, > > What does the PWRSEQ_DEV() macro do? In fact, this should be compatible string, I exampled it as USB vid,pid wrongly. > > Since the pwrseq_match_table_list is static, we can always do match, and > > will not return -EPROBE_DEFER anymore, one problem for this is we need > > always compile all pwrseq libraries. Any good suggestions? > > You never returned -EPROBE_DEFER in the first case. That's why I complained. :-) > > So, in case the OF match doesn't succeed, there are no reason to > propagate an error, but instead just bail out and returning 0 to the > caller. > > If the OF match succeeds, it means the device requires a pwrseq > library to be used. Then, pwrseq_XX_alloc_instance() will be called, > on demand and which tries to fetch the resources (clocks, gpios etc). > If any of those attempts fetching a resource fails, its corresponding > error code should be propagated to the caller - including > -EPROBE_DEFER. > > Regarding the "always compile all pwrseq libraries"; no we don't need > to do that. Instead we only need a to have a stub function for > pwrseq_XX_alloc_instance, in case its corresponding Kconfig option is > unset. That stub, should of course return an error code. > I will have a updated version for your suggestion, thanks. -- Best Regards, Peter Chen -- 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