On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 10:37 PM, Vivek Gautam
<gautamvivek1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 5:00 AM, Doug Anderson <diand...@chromium.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 6:43 AM, Vivek Gautam <gautam.vi...@samsung.com>
>> wrote:
>>> +static void s5p_ehci_phy_enable(struct s5p_ehci_hcd *s5p_ehci)
>>> +{
>>> + struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(s5p_ehci->dev);
>>> +
>>> + if (s5p_ehci->phy) {
>>> + samsung_usbphy_set_type(s5p_ehci->phy, USB_PHY_TYPE_HOST);
>>
>> This confuses me. Why are you setting the type to host here?
>>
> Being in host controller, before calling usb_phy_init() we set type to
> Host since, with certain SOCs
> like 4210, same register has different bit settings for HOST type and
> device type. So setting this
> to Host type here make the flow of usb_phy_init to go in the direction of
> Host.
OK. I think I need to study the code more...
>>>
>>> + phy = devm_usb_get_phy(&pdev->dev, USB_PHY_TYPE_USB2);
>>> + if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(phy)) {
>>> + /* Fallback to pdata */
>>> + if (!pdata) {
>>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "no platform data or
>>> transceiver defined\n");
>>> + return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>
>> Shouldn't you return -EINVAL like the old code did?
>
> We are deferring the probe since the usb-phy transceiver may get
> probed after ehci/ohci controllers.
> And if we return -EINVAL like the previous code, we would end up not
> setting the phy.
OK. Something is wrong here then, since this really isn't an error:
* It should be commented about why you're deferring.
* You shouldn't have a dev_err for something that's not fatal.
Ideally we'd want something that would force probing to happen in the
right order. I spent a little time looking and didn't see anything,
but maybe I'm missing something obvious. If nothing pops out, the
defer seems OK as long as it is commented well.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
