lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Dec]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v7 2/5] phy: add a driver for the Rockchip SoC internal USB2.0 PHY
From
Hi,

On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 11:24 PM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com> wrote:
> hi,
>
> On Saturday 13 December 2014 05:49 AM, Doug Anderson wrote:
>> Yunzhi,
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 7:07 AM, Yunzhi Li <lyz@rock-chips.com> wrote:
>>> This patch to add a generic PHY driver for ROCKCHIP usb PHYs,
>>> currently this driver can support RK3288. The RK3288 SoC have
>>> three independent USB PHY IPs which are all configured through a
>>> set of registers located in the GRF (general register files)
>>> module.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yunzhi Li <lyz@rock-chips.com>
>>>
>>> ---
>>>
>>> Changes in v7:
>>> - Accept Kishon's comments to use phandle args to find a phy
>>> struct directly and get rid of using a custom of_xlate
>>> function.
>>
>> I'm going to assume you didn't test this version, since it doesn't
>> work for me. At suspend time power is high and my printouts in the
>> powerup/powerdown code aren't called...
>>
>>
>>> + for_each_available_child_of_node(dev->of_node, child) {
>>> + rk_phy = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*rk_phy), GFP_KERNEL);
>>> + if (!rk_phy)
>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>>> +
>>> + if (of_property_read_u32(child, "reg", &reg_offset)) {
>>> + dev_err(dev, "missing reg property in node %s\n",
>>> + child->name);
>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + rk_phy->reg_offset = reg_offset;
>>> + rk_phy->reg_base = grf;
>>> +
>>> + rk_phy->clk = of_clk_get_by_name(child, "phyclk");
>>> + if (IS_ERR(rk_phy->clk))
>>> + rk_phy->clk = NULL;
>>> +
>>> + rk_phy->phy = devm_phy_create(dev, child, &ops);
>>> + if (IS_ERR(rk_phy->phy)) {
>>> + dev_err(dev, "failed to create PHY\n");
>>> + return PTR_ERR(rk_phy->phy);
>>> + }
>>> + phy_set_drvdata(rk_phy->phy, rk_phy);
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + phy_provider = devm_of_phy_provider_register(dev, of_phy_simple_xlate);
>>
>> I think your bug is here. I think you now need to register 3 phy
>> providers, not just one.
>
> No there should be only one phy provider. It means the bug is elsewhere.

Ah. That's what I get for testing on a backported kernel. I bet it's
because I'm missing:

2a4c370 phy: core: Fix of_phy_provider_lookup to return PHY provider
for sub node

Hrm, that made things better, but I still only got one printout when I
expected 3 (one for each user of the PHY). I bet there are more picks
I need then... :-/ Ah, yup. When I pick the whole load of PHY
related stuff then I get all 3. :)

I'll do more testing when I have more time and post up a Tested-by, then...

-Doug


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-12-14 00:41    [W:0.610 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site