On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 12:17:49PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote: > > > On 8/13/2020 3:01 AM, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote: > > Hi everyone. > > > > On Mon, 2020-06-29 at 18:18 +0200, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote: > > > On the Raspberry Pi 4, after a PCI reset, VL805's firmware may either be > > > loaded directly from an EEPROM or, if not present, by the SoC's > > > co-processor, VideoCore. This series reworks how we handle this. > > > > > > The previous solution makes use of PCI quirks and exporting platform > > > specific functions. Albeit functional it feels pretty shoehorned. This > > > proposes an alternative way of handling the triggering of the xHCI chip > > > initialization trough means of a reset controller. > > > > > > The benefits are pretty evident: less platform churn in core xHCI code, > > > and no explicit device dependency management in pcie-brcmstb. > > > > > > Note that patch #1 depends on another series[1], that was just applied > > > into the clk maintainer's tree. > > > > > > The series is based on v5.8-rc3 > > > > > > v3: https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg813612.html > > > v2: https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/9/875 > > > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-usb/20200608192701.18355-1-nsaenzjulienne@xxxxxxx/T/#t > > > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-clk/159304773261.62212.983376627029743900@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#t > > > > > > --- > > > > We were waiting on a dependency to be merged upstream to get this. They are now > > in, so could we move things forward? > > > > I can take the device tree patches, I guess philipp can take the reset > > controller code. But I'm not so sure who should be taking the PCI/USB > > counterparts. > > Should we route everything through the USB tree since that is where the > changes that do require synchronization with other subsystems and DTS is > needed the most? > -- > Florian That's fine with me, if everyone else is ok with it :)
