[PATCH v2 1/2] phy: cadence: cdns-dphy: Fix PLL lock and O_CMN_READY polling

[Devarsh Thakkar]

Hi Tomi,

Thanks for the review.

On 02/04/25 17:25, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
<snip>
>>   /*
>>    * This is the reference implementation of DPHY hooks. Specific 
>> integration of
>>    * this IP may have to re-implement some of them depending on how 
>> they decided
>> @@ -278,6 +309,8 @@ static const struct cdns_dphy_ops j721e_dphy_ops = {
>>       .get_wakeup_time_ns = cdns_dphy_j721e_get_wakeup_time_ns,
>>       .set_pll_cfg = cdns_dphy_j721e_set_pll_cfg,
>>       .set_psm_div = cdns_dphy_j721e_set_psm_div,
>> +    .wait_for_pll_lock = cdns_dphy_j721e_wait_for_pll_lock,
>> +    .wait_for_cmn_ready = cdns_dphy_j721e_wait_for_cmn_ready,
>>   };
>>   static int cdns_dphy_config_from_opts(struct phy *phy,
>> @@ -373,6 +406,14 @@ static int cdns_dphy_configure(struct phy *phy, 
>> union phy_configure_opts *opts)
>>             FIELD_PREP(DPHY_BAND_CFG_RIGHT_BAND, band_ctrl);
>>       writel(reg, dphy->regs + DPHY_BAND_CFG);
>> +    ret = cdns_dphy_wait_for_pll_lock(dphy);
>> +    if (ret)
>> +        dev_err(&dphy->phy->dev, "Failed to lock PLL with err %d\n", 
>> ret);
>> +
>> +    ret = cdns_dphy_wait_for_cmn_ready(dphy);
>> +    if (ret)
>> +        dev_err(&dphy->phy->dev, "O_CMN_READY signal failed to assert 
>> with err %d\n", ret);
>> +
> 
> Shouldn't these return an error? Or what's the reason these are ok (and 
> if so, should the prints be dev_dbg?)
> 

Yes, I think it would be better if we can return error and fail if 
timeout happen. I will fix it in next revision.

Regards
Devarsh

>   Tomi
> 
>>       return 0;
>>   }
>