[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <546A1F64.7000209@cogentembedded.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2014 19:16:36 +0300
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
To: Vivek Gautam <gautamvivek1987@...il.com>
CC: Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@...sung.com>,
Linux USB Mailing List <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, kishon <kishon@...com>,
Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>,
Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
Kukjin Kim <kgene.kim@...sung.com>,
Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...el.com>,
Julius Werner <jwerner@...gle.com>,
Jingoo Han <jg1.han@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 1/2] usb: host: xhci-plat: Get PHYs for xhci's hcds
Hello.
On 11/17/2014 9:36 AM, Vivek Gautam wrote:
>>> The host controller by itself may sometimes need to handle PHY
>>> and re-initialize it to re-configure some of the PHY parameters
>>> to get full support out of the PHY controller.
>>> Therefore, facilitate getting the two possible PHYs, viz.
>>> USB 2.0 type (UTMI+) and USB 3.0 type (PIPE3), and initialize them.
>>> Signed-off-by: Vivek Gautam <gautam.vivek@...sung.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/usb/host/xhci-plat.c | 74
>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 74 insertions(+)
>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-plat.c b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-plat.c
>>> index 3d78b0c..5207d5b 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/usb/host/xhci-plat.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/xhci-plat.c
[...]
>>> @@ -204,6 +271,8 @@ static int xhci_plat_suspend(struct device *dev)
>>> struct usb_hcd *hcd = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>>> struct xhci_hcd *xhci = hcd_to_xhci(hcd);
>>>
>>> + phy_exit(hcd->phy);
>> Hm, in the suspend() method?
> phy_exit() should eventually be suspending the PHY and put it to
> low power state.
I thought it's a role that the power_off() mothod should play, considering
that the power_on() method gets called after the init() method....
> phy_init() in resume() will then take up the task of activating the
> PHY again.
> phy_power_on() and phy_power_off() are called at xhci_probe() and remove() time.
Of course.
> Does this makes sense ?
Not much, really.
WBR, Sergei
--
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