| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4FFBCF45.7000304@ti.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 12:14:21 +0530
From: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...com>
To: "ABRAHAM, KISHON VIJAY" <kishon@...com>
CC: grant.likely@...retlab.ca, rob.herring@...xeda.com,
rob@...dley.net, linux@....linux.org.uk,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, b-cousson@...com, tony@...mide.com,
devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
balbi@...com, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, hvaibhav@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 05/11] drivers: usb: twl6030: Add dt support for twl6030
usb
On Tuesday 10 July 2012 11:58 AM, ABRAHAM, KISHON VIJAY wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Rajendra Nayak<rnayak@...com> wrote:
>> On Thursday 28 June 2012 05:21 PM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
>>>
>>> Add device tree support for twl6030 usb driver.
>>> Update the Documentation with device tree binding information.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kishon Vijay Abraham I<kishon@...com>
>>> ---
>>> .../devicetree/bindings/usb/twlxxxx-usb.txt | 18 ++++++++
>>> drivers/usb/otg/twl6030-usb.c | 45
>>> ++++++++++++++------
>>> 2 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/twlxxxx-usb.txt
>>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/twlxxxx-usb.txt
>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/twlxxxx-usb.txt
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..f293271
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/twlxxxx-usb.txt
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
>>> +USB COMPARATOR OF TWL CHIPS
>>> +
>>> +TWL6030 USB COMPARATOR
>>> + - compatible : Should be "ti,twl6030-usb"
>>> + - interrupts : Two interrupt numbers to the cpu should be specified.
>>> First
>>> + interrupt number is the otg interrupt number that raises ID interrupts
>>> when
>>> + the controller has to act as host and the second interrupt number is
>>> the
>>> + usb interrupt number that raises VBUS interrupts when the controller
>>> has to
>>> + act as device
>>> + - regulator :<supply-name> can be "vusb" or "ldousb"
>>> + -<supply-name>-supply : phandle to the regulator device tree node
>>> +
>>> +twl6030-usb {
>>> + compatible = "ti,twl6030-usb";
>>> + interrupts =< 4 10>;
>>> + regulator = "vusb";
>>> + vusb-supply =<&vusb>;
>>
>>
>> This doesn't seem right. Why do you ned a 'regulator' string along
>> with the phandle?
>
> The original code was something like
> if (twl->features& TWL6025_SUBCLASS)
> regulator_name = "ldousb";
> else
> regulator_name = "vusb";
>
> I wasn't sure how to handle this *TWL6025_SUBCLASS* stuff.
>
>>
>>> +};
>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/otg/twl6030-usb.c b/drivers/usb/otg/twl6030-usb.c
>>> index 6a361d2..20b7abe 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/usb/otg/twl6030-usb.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/otg/twl6030-usb.c
>>> @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ struct twl6030_usb {
>>> u8 asleep;
>>> bool irq_enabled;
>>> bool vbus_enable;
>>> - unsigned long features;
>>> + const char *regulator;
>>> };
>>>
>>> #define comparator_to_twl(x) container_of((x), struct twl6030_usb,
>>> comparator)
>>> @@ -153,13 +153,6 @@ static int twl6030_start_srp(struct phy_companion
>>> *comparator)
>>>
>>> static int twl6030_usb_ldo_init(struct twl6030_usb *twl)
>>> {
>>> - char *regulator_name;
>>> -
>>> - if (twl->features& TWL6025_SUBCLASS)
>>>
>>> - regulator_name = "ldousb";
>>> - else
>>> - regulator_name = "vusb";
>>> -
>>> /* Set to OTG_REV 1.3 and turn on the ID_WAKEUP_COMP */
>>> twl6030_writeb(twl, TWL6030_MODULE_ID0 , 0x1, TWL6030_BACKUP_REG);
>>>
>>> @@ -169,7 +162,7 @@ static int twl6030_usb_ldo_init(struct twl6030_usb
>>> *twl)
>>> /* Program MISC2 register and set bit VUSB_IN_VBAT */
>>> twl6030_writeb(twl, TWL6030_MODULE_ID0 , 0x10, TWL6030_MISC2);
>>>
>>> - twl->usb3v3 = regulator_get(twl->dev, regulator_name);
>>> + twl->usb3v3 = regulator_get(twl->dev, twl->regulator);
>>> if (IS_ERR(twl->usb3v3))
>>> return -ENODEV;
>>>
>>> @@ -324,9 +317,9 @@ static int __devinit twl6030_usb_probe(struct
>>> platform_device *pdev)
>>> {
>>> struct twl6030_usb *twl;
>>> int status, err;
>>> - struct twl4030_usb_data *pdata;
>>> - struct device *dev =&pdev->dev;
>>>
>>> - pdata = dev->platform_data;
>>> + struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node;
>>> + struct device *dev =&pdev->dev;
>>>
>>> + struct twl4030_usb_data *pdata = dev->platform_data;
>>>
>>> twl = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof *twl, GFP_KERNEL);
>>> if (!twl)
>>> @@ -335,13 +328,28 @@ static int __devinit twl6030_usb_probe(struct
>>> platform_device *pdev)
>>> twl->dev =&pdev->dev;
>>>
>>> twl->irq1 = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
>>> twl->irq2 = platform_get_irq(pdev, 1);
>>> - twl->features = pdata->features;
>>> twl->linkstat = OMAP_MUSB_UNKNOWN;
>>>
>>> twl->comparator.set_vbus = twl6030_set_vbus;
>>> twl->comparator.start_srp = twl6030_start_srp;
>>> omap_usb2_set_comparator(&twl->comparator);
>>>
>>> + if (np) {
>>> + err = of_property_read_string(np,
>>> "regulator",&twl->regulator);
>>>
>>> + if (err< 0) {
>>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "unable to get regulator\n");
>>> + return err;
>>> + }
>>
>>
>> Isn't there a better way for the driver to know which supply to use instead
>> of DT passing the supply name?
>
> The problem I see is this same driver is used for twl6030 and twl6025
> and the regulator used is different for these two chips (And I think
hmm, so based on what chip is used on a board, shouldn't the board dts
file just map the right regulator with a supply name?
This doesn't look like something the driver should be bothered about.
> twl6025 will also use the same dt file as twl6030 as I don't see a
> different file for 6025).
>
> Thanks
> Kishon
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists