On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 07:54:55PM +0530, George Cherian wrote: > On 7/30/2013 2:23 PM, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > >On 07/30/2013 07:19 AM, George Cherian wrote: > >>>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. > >that omap-control driver looks a little strange. It has a compatible > >field saying ti,omap-control-usb and then it requires additionally a > >ti,type property which should have been avoided. > > ti,type property is to differentiate between usb2 and usb3 phy for a > single soc. > for eg: OMAP5 has both usb2 and usb3 phy let's try not to add any new TI-specific DT bindings, can you figure that out by reading some revision register ? Or perhaps by using different compatible strings ? -- balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
