Hi,
On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:34:08AM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 03:15:01AM -0400, Chao Xie wrote:
> >>>> Some controller need software to initialize PHY before add
> >>>> host controller, and shut down PHY after remove host controller.
> >>>> Add the generic code for these controllers so they do not need
> >>>> do it in its own host controller driver.
> >>>>
> >>>> Signed-off-by: Chao Xie <chao.xie@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>> ---
> >>>> drivers/usb/core/hcd.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
> >>>> 1 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/core/hcd.c b/drivers/usb/core/hcd.c
> >>>> index d53547d..b26196b 100644
> >>>> --- a/drivers/usb/core/hcd.c
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/core/hcd.c
> >>>> @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@
> >>>>
> >>>> #include <linux/usb.h>
> >>>> #include <linux/usb/hcd.h>
> >>>> +#include <linux/usb/phy.h>
> >>>>
> >>>> #include "usb.h"
> >>>>
> >>>> @@ -2531,12 +2532,22 @@ int usb_add_hcd(struct usb_hcd *hcd,
> >>>> */
> >>>> set_bit(HCD_FLAG_RH_RUNNING, &hcd->flags);
> >>>>
> >>>> + /* Initialize the PHY before other hardware operation. */
> >>>> + if (hcd->phy) {
> >>>
> >>> this looks wrong for two reasons:
> >>>
> >>> a) you're not grabbing the PHY here.
> >>>
> >>> You can't just assume another entity grabbed your PHY for you.
> >>
> >> Isn't that done in the controller drivers e.g. ehci-fsl.c, ohci-omap, etc?
> >
> > right, and what I'm saying is that it should all be re-factored into
> > ehci-hcd core :-)
> >
> >> If the controllers don't want HCD core to manage the PHY they can just set it
> >> to some error code.
> >
> > they shouldn't have the choice, otherwise it'll be a bit of a PITA to
> > maintain the code. ehci core tries to grab the PHY, if it's not there,
> > try to continue anyway. Assume it's not needed.
> >
>
> OK fine, but ehci-omap is a weird case as it needs a slightly different
> sequence as to when PHY is initialized depending on which mode it is. (Transceiver
> or transceiver-less). please see this fix.
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/stable/msg12106.html
>
> All I'm saying as that ehci-omap needs a way to tell hcd core that it needs PHY
> handling for itself.
why don't you do that always ? Meaning, why don't you *always* take PHY
out of suspend ? If PHY is suspended, you can't wakeup unless you have
(in OMAP case) pad wakeup working, right ?
Moreover, if you can suspend the PHY and still wakup, that's something
we need to teach the PHY layer about. Currently it doesn't know anything
about such wakeup capable PHYs ;-)
--
balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
