[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] phy-sun4i-usb: Add full support for usb0 phy / OTG

Kishon Vijay Abraham I kishon at ti.com
Thu Jun 11 05:59:38 PDT 2015



On Thursday 11 June 2015 06:05 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 11-06-15 13:16, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Thursday 11 June 2015 03:23 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On 11-06-15 11:42, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On Sunday 31 May 2015 09:40 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>>>>> The usb0 phy is connected to an OTG controller, and as such needs some special
>>>>> handling:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1) It allows explicit control over the pullups, enable these on phy_init and
>>>>> disable them on phy_exit.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2) It has bits to signal id and vbus detect to the musb-core, add support for
>>>>> for monitoring id and vbus detect gpio-s for use in dual role mode, and set
>>>>> these bits to the correct values for operating in host only mode when no
>>>>> gpios are specified in the devicetree.
>>>>>
>>>>> 3) When in dual role mode the musb sunxi glue needs to know if the a host or
>>>>> device cable is plugged in, so when in dual role mode register an extcon.
>>>>>
>>>>> While updating the devicetree binding documentation also add documentation
>>>>> for the sofar undocumented usage of regulators for vbus for all 3 phys.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede at redhat.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> Changes in v2:
>>>>> -Removed the sunxi specific phy functions, instead the id / vbus gpio polling
>>>>>     has been moved to the phy-sun4i-usb driver and their status is exported
>>>>>     through extcon for the sunxi-musb glue
>>>>> Changes in v3:
>>>>> -No changes
>>>>> Changes in v4:
>>>>> -Do not call regulator_disable in an unbalanced manner when an external vbus
>>>>>     is present
>>>>> ---
>>>>>     .../devicetree/bindings/phy/sun4i-usb-phy.txt      |  18 +-
>>>>>     drivers/phy/Kconfig                                |   1 +
>>>>>     drivers/phy/phy-sun4i-usb.c                        | 273 ++++++++++++++++++++-
>>>>>     3 files changed, 281 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>>>>>
>>>> .
>>>> .
>>>> <snip>
>>>> .
>>>> .
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-sun4i-usb.c b/drivers/phy/phy-sun4i-usb.c
>>>>> index 91c5be4..b45d707 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/phy/phy-sun4i-usb.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/phy/phy-sun4i-usb.c
>>>>> @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
>>>>
>>>> .
>>>> .
>>>> <snip>
>>>> .
>>>> .
>>>>>     static struct phy *sun4i_usb_phy_xlate(struct device *dev,
>>>>>                         struct of_phandle_args *args)
>>>>>     {
>>>>> @@ -240,13 +417,20 @@ static int sun4i_usb_phy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>>         struct phy_provider *phy_provider;
>>>>>         bool dedicated_clocks;
>>>>>         struct resource *res;
>>>>> -    int i;
>>>>> +    int i, ret;
>>>>>
>>>>>         data = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*data), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>>>         if (!data)
>>>>>             return -ENOMEM;
>>>>>
>>>>>         mutex_init(&data->mutex);
>>>>> +    INIT_DELAYED_WORK(&data->detect, sun4i_usb_phy0_id_vbus_det_scan);
>>>>> +    data->extcon_cable_names[0] = extcon_cable_name[EXTCON_USB_HOST];
>>>>> +    data->extcon_cable_names[1] = extcon_cable_name[EXTCON_USB];
>>>>> +    data->extcon_cable_names[2] = NULL;
>>>>> +    data->extcon.name = DRIVER_NAME;
>>>>> +    data->extcon.supported_cable = data->extcon_cable_names;
>>>>> +    data->extcon.dev.parent = dev;
>>>>>
>>>>>         if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "allwinner,sun5i-a13-usb-phy"))
>>>>>             data->num_phys = 2;
>>>>> @@ -269,6 +453,34 @@ static int sun4i_usb_phy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>>         if (IS_ERR(data->base))
>>>>>             return PTR_ERR(data->base);
>>>>>
>>>>> +    data->id_det_gpio = devm_gpiod_get(dev, "usb0_id_det", GPIOD_IN);
>>>>> +    if (IS_ERR(data->id_det_gpio)) {
>>>>> +        if (PTR_ERR(data->id_det_gpio) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
>>>>> +            return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>>> +        data->id_det_gpio = NULL;
>>>>> +    }
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    data->vbus_det_gpio = devm_gpiod_get(dev, "usb0_vbus_det", GPIOD_IN);
>>>>> +    if (IS_ERR(data->vbus_det_gpio)) {
>>>>> +        if (PTR_ERR(data->vbus_det_gpio) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
>>>>> +            return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>>>> +        data->vbus_det_gpio = NULL;
>>>>> +    }
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    /* We either want both gpio pins or neither (when in host mode) */
>>>>> +    if (!data->id_det_gpio != !data->vbus_det_gpio) {
>>>>> +        dev_err(dev, "failed to get id or vbus detect pin\n");
>>>>> +        return -ENODEV;
>>>>> +    }
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    if (data->id_det_gpio) {
>>>>> +        ret = devm_extcon_dev_register(dev, &data->extcon);
>>>>> +        if (ret) {
>>>>> +            dev_err(dev, "failed to register extcon: %d\n", ret);
>>>>> +            return ret;
>>>>> +        }
>>>>> +    }
>>>>> +
>>>>>         for (i = 0; i < data->num_phys; i++) {
>>>>>             struct sun4i_usb_phy *phy = data->phys + i;
>>>>>             char name[16];
>>>>> @@ -318,12 +530,54 @@ static int sun4i_usb_phy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>>             phy_set_drvdata(phy->phy, &data->phys[i]);
>>>>>         }
>>>>>
>>>>> +    data->id_det_irq = gpiod_to_irq(data->id_det_gpio);
>>>>> +    data->vbus_det_irq = gpiod_to_irq(data->vbus_det_gpio);
>>>>> +    if (data->id_det_irq  < 0 || data->vbus_det_irq < 0)
>>>>> +        data->phy0_poll = true;
>>>>
>>>> if polling is enabled, we shouldn't enable irq at all?
>>>
>>> Thanks for the review.
>>>
>>> One some boards one of the gpio-s is irq capable and the other
>>> is not, in which case the current code indeed enables both
>>> irq handling for the one gpio which is irq capable and enables
>>> polling. This is done this way deliberately as the irq path
>>> has much better latency then polling and the 2 can co-exist.
>>
>> okay. Would be good to have this as a comment.
>>>
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    if (data->id_det_irq >= 0) {
>>>>> +        ret = devm_request_irq(dev, data->id_det_irq,
>>>>> +                sun4i_usb_phy0_id_vbus_det_irq,
>>>>> +                IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING,
>>>>> +                "usb0-id-det", data);
>>>>> +        if (ret) {
>>>>> +            dev_err(dev, "Err requesting id-det-irq: %d\n", ret);
>>>>> +            return ret;
>>>>> +        }
>>>>> +    }
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    if (data->vbus_det_irq >= 0) {
>>>>> +        ret = devm_request_irq(dev, data->vbus_det_irq,
>>>>> +                sun4i_usb_phy0_id_vbus_det_irq,
>>>>> +                IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | IRQF_TRIGGER_FALLING,
>>>>> +                "usb0-vbus-det", data);
>>>>> +        if (ret) {
>>>>> +            dev_err(dev, "Err requesting vbus-det-irq: %d\n", ret);
>>>>> +            return ret;
>>>>> +        }
>>>>> +    }
>>>>> +
>>>>>         dev_set_drvdata(dev, data);
>>>>>         phy_provider = devm_of_phy_provider_register(dev, sun4i_usb_phy_xlate);
>>>>>
>>>>>         return PTR_ERR_OR_ZERO(phy_provider);
>>>>>     }
>>>>>
>>>>> +static int sun4i_usb_phy_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>>> +{
>>>>> +    struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
>>>>> +    struct sun4i_usb_phy_data *data = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
>>>>> +
>>>>> +    if (data->id_det_irq >= 0)
>>>>> +        devm_free_irq(dev, data->id_det_irq, data);
>>>>> +    if (data->vbus_det_irq >= 0)
>>>>> +        devm_free_irq(dev, data->vbus_det_irq, data);
>>>>
>>>> This shouldn't be needed since you already use devm_* in probe.
>>>
>>> The use of devm_* in probe helps to keep the error handling in
>>> probe sane, but we must explicitly free the irqs here, otherwise
>>> they may trigger after this:
>>
>>   From whatever I know free irq will be invoked in remove if devm_request_irq is used in probe. I have to check though.
>
> Yes it will be invoked, but after we've stopped our workqueue function,
> and in the mean time the irq handler can trigger re-scheduling the
> workqueue function.
>
> All drivers using a workqueue explicitly free irqs on remove before
> stopping the workqueue because of this reason. The auto freeing
> of the irq happens after the remove function has been called, and
> thus after the workqueue has been stopped/cancelled which is too
> late.

Fine then. Thanks for that detail.

Thanks
Kishon



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list