On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 01:17:13PM -0800, Paul Zimmerman wrote: > > From: Felipe Balbi [mailto:balbi@xxxxxx] > > Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2012 2:26 AM > > > > On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 06:57:02PM -0800, Paul Zimmerman wrote: > > > @@ -56,7 +55,7 @@ struct dwc3_pci { > > > static int __devinit dwc3_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pci, > > > const struct pci_device_id *id) > > > { > > > - struct resource res[2]; > > > + struct resource res[3]; > > > struct platform_device *dwc3; > > > struct dwc3_pci *glue; > > > int ret = -ENOMEM; > > > @@ -102,6 +101,16 @@ static int __devinit dwc3_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pci, > > > res[1].name = "dwc_usb3"; > > > res[1].flags = IORESOURCE_IRQ; > > > > > > + if (pci->vendor == PCI_VENDOR_ID_SYNOPSYS && > > > + pci->device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_SYNOPSYS_HAPSUSB3) { > > > + /* Add dummy resource to tell dwc3 driver this is HAPS */ > > > + dev_vdbg(&pci->dev, "adding dummy resource for HAPS\n"); > > > + res[2].start = 0; > > > + res[2].end = 1; > > > + res[2].name = "dwc_usb3_haps"; > > > + res[2].flags = IORESOURCE_MEM; > > > + } > > > > instead, you need to add a dev_pm_ops on this file too (as I said on the > > last mail), then you can move this check to dwc3-pci.c's > > runtime_resume/suspend and call haps specific stuff from there. Just > > make a big code comment stating that HAPS is a special situation because > > it's non-standard FPGA-only platform. > > > > This will also let you remove the "is_haps" flag from core.c which > > doesn't make much sense anyway. If I let "is_haps" go in, soon we will > > have > > is_my_perfect_special_architecture_which_is_better_then_the_rest_of_you > > for every single user and that makes frightens me quite a lot ;-) > > Unfortunately, I don't see a way to make that work. The way the > interface between the modules is designed, dwc3-pci does not have > access to the DWC3 registers. Plus, dwc3-pci does not have access to > the 'struct dwc3' pointer either, so it has no way to see the software > state of the dwc3 driver. > > We could redesign that, so the register space is mapped and the > 'struct dwc3' is allocated in the glue layer instead of in dwc3. > Would you be up for that? If so, I could prepare an RFC patch for > that. no no, that'll cause problems when removing modules. If you remove dwc3-pci.ko before dwc3.ko, the latter could try to access already freed memory. You could split the PCI address space into DWC USB3 IP specific and the rest (which is HAPS specific), unless you're mapping your HAPS-specific part on an unused area of the DWC USB3 IP address space, then, well, we need to think how to handle it. -- balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
