linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: phy: add bcm63xx-usbh bindings

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <d289fb29-3491-080c-0615-b956e5c37f3e@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 Jun 2020 14:35:57 -0700
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Álvaro Fernández Rojas <noltari@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc:     Jonas Gorski <jonas.gorski@...il.com>, kishon@...com,
        vkoul@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com, p.zabel@...gutronix.de,
        krzk@...nel.org, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, alcooperx@...il.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] dt-bindings: phy: add bcm63xx-usbh bindings



On 6/17/2020 4:16 AM, Álvaro Fernández Rojas wrote:
>> On 6328, the same register space allows the controlling of the USB PHY
>> in either host or device mode, so I believe you would need to add a
>> #phy-cells = 1 in order to distinguish the consumer (host versus device)
>> if we get to the point where drivers/usb/gadget/udc/bcm63xx_udc.c
>> becomes DT aware.
> 
> I’ve just realized that I have implemented this wrong in v3, because I implemented the SwapControl USB_DEVICE_SEL value, and you meant the UTMIControl1 USB_DEVICE_MODE_SEL value.

Right that is the register I was referring to.

> So I have a couple of questions about this, because I haven’t got any bcm63xx with usb device configuration to test:
> - Is USB_DEVICE_SEL also needed in SwapControl or do we only need USB_DEVICE_MODE_SEL in UTMIControl1?

It looks like it depends on the device, for 6318 and 63268, there is
USB_DEVICE_MODE_SEL defined, but not for 6328, 6362 or 6368 for
instance. Note that USB_DEVICE_MODE_SEL is relevant for port 2 only for
6318 and 63268 whereas the UTMI_CONTROL1 appears to be for any port.

> - Are the rest of the host values needed when configured in device mode? Should I only set the device values when in device mode?

They could probably be configured although I am not sure they sure they
will be used at all, it's been a while since I looked at this (over 8
years).

I don't know if you have any board with USB device mode capability, if
you do not please email privately and I will ship you one.
-- 
Florian