linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] phy: add a driver for the Rockchip SoC internal USB2.0 PHY

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <54894B52.3060105@rock-chips.com>
Date:	Thu, 11 Dec 2014 15:44:18 +0800
From:	Yunzhi Li <lyz@...k-chips.com>
To:	Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>, heiko@...ech.de,
	jwerner@...omium.org, dianders@...omium.org
CC:	olof@...om.net, huangtao@...k-chips.com, zyw@...k-chips.com,
	cf@...k-chips.com, linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/5] phy: add a driver for the Rockchip SoC internal
 USB2.0 PHY

Hi Kishon:

On 2014/12/11 14:02, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wednesday 10 December 2014 04:16 PM, Yunzhi Li wrote:
>> This patch to add a generic PHY driver for ROCKCHIP usb PHYs,
>> currently this driver can support RK3288. The RK3288 SoC have
>> three independent USB PHY IPs which are all configured through a
>> set of registers located in the GRF (general register files)
>> module.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yunzhi Li <lyz@...k-chips.com>
>>
>> +
>> +#define ROCKCHIP_RK3288_UOC(n)	(0x320 + n * 0x14)
>> +
>> +/*
>> + * The higher 16-bit of this register is used for write protection
>> + * only if BIT(13 + 16) set to 1 the BIT(13) can be written.
>> + */
>> +#define SIDDQ_MSK		BIT(13 + 16)
> I think here the "MSK" is misleading. it should be something that refers write
> protection?
So, #define SIDDQ_WRITE_ENA  BIT(29) , could be ok ?
>> +#define SIDDQ_ON		BIT(13)
>> +#define SIDDQ_OFF		(0 << 13)
>> +
>> +struct rockchip_usb_phy {
>> +	struct regmap	*reg_base;
>> +	unsigned int	reg_offset;
>> +	struct clk	*clk;
>> +	struct phy	*phy;
>> +	unsigned	index;
>> +};
>> +
>> +struct rockchip_usb_phy_priv {
>> +	struct rockchip_usb_phy	*phys;
>> +	unsigned		nphys;
>> +};
>> +
>> +static int rockchip_usb_phy_power(struct rockchip_usb_phy *phy,
>> +					   bool siddq)
>> +{
>> +	return regmap_write(phy->reg_base, phy->reg_offset,
>> +			    SIDDQ_MSK | (siddq ? SIDDQ_ON : SIDDQ_OFF));
> Shouldn't we actually reset the bit for power off?
Sorry, which bit you refer to here  and why should it be reset? could 
you give more infomation.

---
Yunzhi Li @ rockchip

--
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/