On 7/29/2013 8:47 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
* George Cherian | 2013-07-19 18:04:35 [+0530]:
Adds phy driver support for am33xx platform, the host/device
peripheral controller shall get this phy object to control the phy
operations.
If you rebase this on-top of the two instances patches I've sent earlier
then you can bury patch 3 and 4, right?
Yes True. I posted it for completeness.
I don't like very much the way you obtain the phy id:
+ of_property_read_u32(np, "id", &phy->id);
with the .dts changes I made you should able to use
of_alias_get_id()
instead.
Let me look what you have additionaly:
- usbotg_fck
Is this really required? I have the phy as a child of the "main"
device which has a hwmod property which is associated with this clock.
So pm enable/ disable should also enable this clock if possible,
right?
- device wakeup via omap_control_am335x_phy_wkup()
Now. that is one thing that the simple phy driver is missing. If you
call a magic function for this to happen than I don't have to worry
about the missing memory space for this function.
So from what I see now, it is most likely the easiest thing to just add
that wakeup to the phy driver I posted. Do you agree?
The whole idea of writing a seperate phy driver was to use the generic phy framework
and most of the amxxxx devices have the same phy (eg am335x, am437x).
Now since the register is shared in am335x for phy_wkup (Not in the case of am437x)
how are you planning to map it. I feel if omap_control_usb can delegate the writes
to phy_wkup, phy_on and phy_off, it makes the life simpler.
Thoughts???
If so we need to figure out where the memory for the wakeup register is
comming from. We need also to ensure that both phys can not write at the
same time. A look would be nice.
Signed-off-by: George Cherian <george.cherian@xxxxxx>
Sebastian
--
-George
--
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
