On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 11:04:58AM +0530, ABRAHAM, KISHON VIJAY wrote: > Hi, > > On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 3:33 PM, Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 08/24/2012 08:51 AM, Richard Zhao wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 07:22:54PM +0200, Marc Kleine-Budde wrote: > >>> This patch registers the msx-phy as an USB_PHY_TYPE_USB2. This is needed to get > >>> reference to the phy with devm_usb_get_phy_by_phandle(), which will be added in > >>> a later patch. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> drivers/usb/otg/mxs-phy.c | 5 ++++- > >>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/otg/mxs-phy.c b/drivers/usb/otg/mxs-phy.c > >>> index c1a67cb..240b945 100644 > >>> --- a/drivers/usb/otg/mxs-phy.c > >>> +++ b/drivers/usb/otg/mxs-phy.c > >>> @@ -141,11 +141,14 @@ static int mxs_phy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >>> > >>> platform_set_drvdata(pdev, &mxs_phy->phy); > >>> > >>> - return 0; > >>> + return usb_add_phy(&mxs_phy->phy, USB_PHY_TYPE_USB2); > >> Why is it usb2? It's kind of USB_PHY_TYPE_DT. > > > > For now there is USB_PHY_TYPE_USB2, USB_PHY_TYPE_USB3 and undefined. On > > the one hand it's an USB2 type phy on the other the type is not relevant > > if you get the phy by a phandle. I think it should be USB2. Kishon, what > > do you think? > > IMHO, USB_PHY_TYPE_DT does not qualify to be a phy type. > USB_PHY_TYPE_USB2 makes more sense to me. Why is USB_PHY_TYPE_USB2 better? It might not be attached to usb2. undefined may be better, if it's not used to check re-initialization. Thanks Richard > > Thanks > Kishon > -- 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
