linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] phy: qcom-usb-hs: Add qcom,dp-manual-pullup logic

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: <Y64Jgu2o6aJV4ggk@gerhold.net>
Date:   Thu, 29 Dec 2022 22:41:22 +0100
From:   Stephan Gerhold <stephan@...hold.net>
To:     Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>
Cc:     agross@...nel.org, andersson@...nel.org, vkoul@...nel.org,
        kishon@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, konrad.dybcio@...aro.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-phy@...ts.infradead.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] phy: qcom-usb-hs: Add qcom,dp-manual-pullup logic

On Thu, Dec 29, 2022 at 09:20:03PM +0000, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> On 29/12/2022 21:11, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> > Then it doesn't seem to be a particularly complete schematic. 😄
> > PM8916 definitely has USB_IN pads (pad # N13, P13). 😄
> 
> Let me check again.
> 
> No sorry USB_IN_0 and USB_IN_1 are connected to +5V in my schematic, I did
> check USB_IN I just forgot why it wasn't usable... +5v not VBUS is what its
> connected to.
> 

That is still good enough to replace qcom,dp-manual-pullup though.

If you have +5V connected to USB_IN then &pm8916_usbin should report
active VBUS permanently. Set it as extcon for &usb and &usb_hs_phy and
you should have VBUSVLDEXT "pulled-up" like in your patch here, without
any driver changes. :-)

It's a bit of a hack of course, which probably deserves a comment in the
device tree. But since it should not make any functional difference
compared to this patch the approach might be easier than getting this
patch finalized & accepted.

I leave that up to you :)

Stephan