Hi, On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 11:45:05AM +0300, Roger Quadros wrote: > >>>>> 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 ? > > > > Maybe I wasn't clear before. This is nothing about wakeup and e always take PHY out of suspend. > The problem is when to take it out of suspend relative to when EHCI controller starts. > Let me clarify. > > In Transceiver mode we need this. > > - bring phy out of reset > - start EHCI controller > > Whereas for Transceiver-less mode we need this. > > - start EHCI controller > - bring phy out of reset > > If there is some way to signal this behaviour to the HCD core, it > should be good enough. alright, now I get it. That's quite messed up that it has to be this way :-p -- balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
