On 12/20/18 21:29, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Quoting Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz (2018-12-07 01:55:58)
From: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@xxxxxxxxxx>
Driver to control the Synopsys SS PHY 1.0.0 implemeneted in QCS404
Based on Sriharsha Allenki's <sallenki@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> original code.
Signed-off-by: Jorge Ramirez-Ortiz <jorge.ramirez-ortiz@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@xxxxxxxxxx>
chain should be swapped?
ok.
Shawn asked me to remove him from the authors list so will remove.
Reviewed-by: Vinod Koul <vkoul@xxxxxxxxxx>
will remove the reviewed-by line as well.
---
diff --git a/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-usb-ss.c b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-usb-ss.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7b6a55e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/phy/qualcomm/phy-qcom-usb-ss.c
+
+struct ssphy_priv {
+ void __iomem *base;
+ struct device *dev;
+ struct reset_control *reset_com;
+ struct reset_control *reset_phy;
+ struct clk *clk_ref;
+ struct clk *clk_phy;
+ struct clk *clk_pipe;
Use bulk clk APIs? And just get and enable all the clks?
yes.
+ struct regulator *vdda1p8;
+ struct regulator *vbus;
+ struct regulator *vdd;
+ unsigned int vdd_levels[LEVEL_NUM];
+};
+
+static inline void qcom_ssphy_updatel(void __iomem *addr, u32 mask, u32 val)
+{
+ writel((readl(addr) & ~mask) | val, addr);
+}
+
+static int qcom_ssphy_config_vdd(struct ssphy_priv *priv,
+ enum phy_vdd_level level)
+{
+ return regulator_set_voltage(priv->vdd,
+ priv->vdd_levels[level],
+ priv->vdd_levels[LEVEL_MAX]);
regulator_set_voltage(reg, 0, max) is very suspicious. It's voltage
corners where the voltages are known?
sorry I dont understand the question
this regulator on the ss phy wold be
vreg_l3_1p05: l3 {
regulator-min-microvolt = <976000>;
regulator-max-microvolt = <1160000>;
};
+}
+
+static int qcom_ssphy_ldo_enable(struct ssphy_priv *priv)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = regulator_set_load(priv->vdda1p8, 23000);
Do you need to do this? Why can't the regulator be in high power mode
all the time and then go low power when it's disabled?
this regulator is shared with the usb hs phy and each (ss/hs) have
different load requirements. why would it be wrong for the ss phy to
announce its needs (which will differ from those of the hs phy)?
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ dev_err(priv->dev, "Failed to set regulator1p8 load\n");
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ ret = regulator_set_voltage(priv->vdda1p8, 1800000, 1800000);
This looks unnecessary. The 1.8V regulator sounds like it better be 1.8V
so board constraints should enforce that. All that should be here is
enabling the regulator.
ok
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(priv->dev, "Failed to set regulator1p8 voltage\n");
+ goto put_vdda1p8_lpm;
+ }
+
+ ret = regulator_enable(priv->vdda1p8);
+ if (ret) {
+ dev_err(priv->dev, "Failed to enable regulator1p8\n");
+ goto unset_vdda1p8;
+ }
+
+ return ret;
+
+ /* rollback regulator changes */
+
+unset_vdda1p8:
+ regulator_set_voltage(priv->vdda1p8, 0, 1800000);
+
+put_vdda1p8_lpm:
+ regulator_set_load(priv->vdda1p8, 0);
+
+ return ret;
+}
+
+static void qcom_ssphy_ldo_disable(struct ssphy_priv *priv)
+{
+ regulator_disable(priv->vdda1p8);
+ regulator_set_voltage(priv->vdda1p8, 0, 1800000);
Urgh why?
since it is being shared with the hs phy I understand this is required
to vote the transition to the lowest voltage state.
+ regulator_set_load(priv->vdda1p8, 0);
+}
