From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753462AbcFOK7K (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jun 2016 06:59:10 -0400 Received: from regular1.263xmail.com ([211.150.99.138]:45125 "EHLO regular1.263xmail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750882AbcFOK7H (ORCPT ); Wed, 15 Jun 2016 06:59:07 -0400 X-263anti-spam: KSV:0; X-MAIL-GRAY: 0 X-MAIL-DELIVERY: 1 X-KSVirus-check: 0 X-ABS-CHECKED: 4 X-ADDR-CHECKED: 0 X-RL-SENDER: frank.wang@rock-chips.com X-FST-TO: frank.wang@rock-chips.com X-SENDER-IP: 58.22.7.114 X-LOGIN-NAME: frank.wang@rock-chips.com X-UNIQUE-TAG: <5ce5b3a04c0135fc5d51f5cabd5b986d> X-ATTACHMENT-NUM: 0 X-DNS-TYPE: 0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] phy: rockchip-inno-usb2: add a new driver for Rockchip usb2phy To: =?UTF-8?Q?Heiko_St=c3=bcbner?= References: <1465783810-18756-1-git-send-email-frank.wang@rock-chips.com> <7225720.0AClDW7eQ6@diego> <44bb6bf0-cf86-c440-665a-b0d441ce4427@rock-chips.com> <20086422.3ieDmpZrvB@diego> Cc: dianders@chromium.org, linux@roeck-us.net, groeck@chromium.org, jwerner@chromium.org, kishon@ti.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, pawel.moll@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk, galak@codeaurora.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, xzy.xu@rock-chips.com, kever.yang@rock-chips.com, huangtao@rock-chips.com, william.wu@rock-chips.com, frank.wang@rock-chips.com From: Frank Wang Message-ID: Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 18:58:43 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20086422.3ieDmpZrvB@diego> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Heiko, On 2016/6/15 17:04, Heiko Stübner wrote: > Hi Frank, > > Am Mittwoch, 15. Juni 2016, 11:23:26 schrieb Frank Wang: >> On 2016/6/14 21:27, Heiko Stübner wrote: >>> Am Montag, 13. Juni 2016, 10:10:10 schrieb Frank Wang: >>>> The newer SoCs (rk3366, rk3399) take a different usb-phy IP block >>>> than rk3288 and before, and most of phy-related registers are also >>>> different from the past, so a new phy driver is required necessarily. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Frank Wang >>>> --- >>>> >>>> Changes in v5: >>>> - Added 'reg' in the data block to match the different phy-blocks in >>>> dt. >>>> >>>> Changes in v4: >>>> - Removed some processes related to 'vbus_host-supply'. >>>> >>>> Changes in v3: >>>> - Resolved the mapping defect between fixed value in driver and the >>>> >>>> property in devicetree. >>>> >>>> - Optimized 480m output clock register function. >>>> - Code cleanup. >>>> >>>> Changes in v2: >>>> - Changed vbus_host operation from gpio to regulator in *_probe. >>>> - Improved the fault treatment relate to 480m clock register. >>>> - Cleaned up some meaningless codes in *_clk480m_disable. >>>> - made more clear the comment of *_sm_work. >>>> >>>> drivers/phy/Kconfig | 7 + >>>> drivers/phy/Makefile | 1 + >>>> drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-inno-usb2.c | 645 >>>> >>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 653 insertions(+) >>>> >>>> [...] >>>> >>>> + >>>> +static int rockchip_usb2phy_exit(struct phy *phy) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct rockchip_usb2phy_port *rport = phy_get_drvdata(phy); >>>> + >>>> >>> if (!rport->port_cfg) >>> >>> return 0; >>>> + if (rport->port_id == USB2PHY_PORT_HOST) >>>> + cancel_delayed_work_sync(&rport->sm_work); >>>> + >>> you will also need to resume the port here, if it is suspended at this >>> point, as phy_power_off gets called after phy_exit and would probably >>> produce clk enable/disable mismatches otherwise. >> Hmm, from my personal point of view, when canceling sm_work here, it may >> not cause the port goes to suspend, isn't it? besides, clk only prepared >> in *_usb2phy_resume(), and unprepared in *_usb2phy_suspend(), so if we >> resume port here, the prepare_count of clk will be increased again, I >> am afraid this is not correct, and am I wrong? would you like to tell me >> more details? > usb2phy_resume gets called both initially through phy_power_on as well. > So it's on but through the first scheduled work call, might get suspended when > nothing is connected. (clk_enable and clk_disable will run). > If nothing is connected on unload phy_power_off will get called while the > clock actually is still disabled. > > So I think it's either resuming on exit, or at least making sure to do nothing > in that case in the phy_power_off callback of the driver. > > Well, I got what you mean. I saw phy_power_on() gets called twice at ehci/ohci driver probe time, one is at pdata->power_on(); another is at usb_add_hcd(), so after that, the power_count of phy increases to two. however, when ehci/ohci driver goes to suspend, there is only once to call phy_power_off(), and the power_count of phy decreases to 1, so our usb2phy_resume() could not be invoked :-) . If so, is it still need to care it? How about use suspended member of rockchip_usb2phy_port as a conditional to check in *_usb2phy_suspend(), if necessary. BR. Frank