| 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: <CAAe_U6+Hap8NEu7zWvTSog6EB_ydvScYSSM1HA6t1Rj3ypWEvA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 13:48:59 +0530
From: "ABRAHAM, KISHON VIJAY" <kishon@...com>
To: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...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
Hi,
On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...com> wrote:
> 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.
Ok. I can do it that way.
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