[v2 PATCH 2/4] phy: Add USB Type-C PHY driver for rk3399
Chris Zhong
zyw at rock-chips.com
Mon Jun 20 00:59:19 PDT 2016
Hi Tomasz
Thanks for your comments.
I will modify all the the part of snip. Please find my reply in the
following.
On 06/18/2016 12:06 AM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
>
> [snip]
>
>> +struct phy_reg {
>> + int value;
>> + int addr;
>> +};
>> +
>> +struct phy_reg usb_pll_cfg[] = {
>> + {0xf0, CMN_PLL0_VCOCAL_INIT},
> CodingStyle: Please add spaces after opening and before closing braces.
>
>> + {0x18, CMN_PLL0_VCOCAL_ITER},
>> + {0xd0, CMN_PLL0_INTDIV},
>> + {0x4a4a, CMN_PLL0_FRACDIV},
>> + {0x34, CMN_PLL0_HIGH_THR},
>> + {0x1ee, CMN_PLL0_SS_CTRL1},
>> + {0x7f03, CMN_PLL0_SS_CTRL2},
>> + {0x20, CMN_PLL0_DSM_DIAG},
>> + {0, CMN_DIAG_PLL0_OVRD},
>> + {0, CMN_DIAG_PLL0_FBH_OVRD},
>> + {0, CMN_DIAG_PLL0_FBL_OVRD},
>> + {0x7, CMN_DIAG_PLL0_V2I_TUNE},
>> + {0x45, CMN_DIAG_PLL0_CP_TUNE},
>> + {0x8, CMN_DIAG_PLL0_LF_PROG},
> It would be generally much, much better if these magic numbers were
> dissected into particular bitfields and defined using macros, if
> possible... The same applies to all other magic numbers in this file.
This magic number is very hard to describe, it is a initialization
sequence from vendor.
Their names are very close to the description.
From spec of cdn type-c phy:
Iteration wait timer value
pll_fb_div_integer value: Value of the pll_fb_div_integer signal.
pll_fb_div_fractional: Value of the pll_fb_div_fractional signal.
pll_fb_div_high_theshold: Value of the pll_fb_div_high_threshold signal.
...
>> +};
>> +
>> +struct phy_reg dp_pll_cfg[] = {
> [snip]
>> +static void tcphy_cfg_usb_pll(struct rockchip_typec_phy *tcphy)
>> +{
>> + u32 rdata;
>> + u32 i;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Selects which PLL clock will be driven on the analog high speed
>> + * clock 0: PLL 0 div 1.
>> + */
>> + rdata = readl(tcphy->base + CMN_DIAG_HSCLK_SEL);
>> + writel(rdata & 0xfffc, tcphy->base + CMN_DIAG_HSCLK_SEL);
> This mask looks suspiciously. Is clearing bits 31-16 and 1-0 what we
> want here? I'd advise for manipulating the value in separate line and
> then only calling writel() with the final value already in the
> variable.
Yes, the register valid length is 16 bits, but the they are stored with
32bit.
readl will return 0 in higher 16bit + valid value in lower 16bit.
and writel will ignore the higher 16bit.
>
>> +
>> + /* load the configuration of PLL0 */
>> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(usb_pll_cfg); i++)
>> + writel(usb_pll_cfg[i].value, tcphy->base + usb_pll_cfg[i].addr);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void tcphy_cfg_dp_pll(struct rockchip_typec_phy *tcphy)
>> +{
>> + u32 rdata;
>> + u32 i;
>> +
>> + /* set the default mode to RBR */
>> + writel(DP_PLL_CLOCK_ENABLE | DP_PLL_ENABLE | DP_PLL_DATA_RATE_RBR,
>> + tcphy->base + DP_CLK_CTL);
> This looks (and is understandable) much better than magic numbers in
> other parts of this file!
>
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Selects which PLL clock will be driven on the analog high speed
>> + * clock 1: PLL 1 div 2.
>> + */
>> + rdata = readl(tcphy->base + CMN_DIAG_HSCLK_SEL);
>> + rdata = (rdata & 0xffcf) | 0x30;
> If the & operation here is used to clear a bitfield, please use the
> negative notation, e.g.
>
> rdata &= ~0x30;
> rdata |= 0x30;
>
> (By the way, the AND NOT and OR with the same value is what the code
> above does, which would make sense if the bitfield mask was defined by
> a macro, but doesn't make any sense with magic numbers.)
>
> It looks like the registers are 16-bit. Should they really be accessed
> with readl() and not readw()? If they are accessed with readl(), what
> is returned in most significant 16 bits and what should be written
> there?
I will use macro here at next version
>
>> + writel(rdata, tcphy->base + CMN_DIAG_HSCLK_SEL);
>> +
>> + /* load the configuration of PLL1 */
>> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(dp_pll_cfg); i++)
>> + writel(dp_pll_cfg[i].value, tcphy->base + dp_pll_cfg[i].addr);
>> +}
> [snip]
>> + }
>> +
>> + ret = clk_prepare_enable(tcphy->clk_ref);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + dev_err(tcphy->dev, "Failed to prepare_enable ref clock\n");
>> + goto clk_ref_failed;
>> + }
> [snip]
>> +static void tcphy_phy_deinit(struct rockchip_typec_phy *tcphy)
>> +{
>> + clk_disable_unprepare(tcphy->clk_core);
>> + clk_disable_unprepare(tcphy->clk_ref);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static const struct phy_ops rockchip_tcphy_ops = {
>> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> Hmm, if there is no phy ops, how the phy consumer drivers request the
> PHY to do anything?
There is no consumer call this phy, the power on and power off are
called by notification.
So I am going to delete this ops next version.
>> +};
>> +
>> +static int tcphy_pd_event(struct notifier_block *nb,
>> + unsigned long event, void *priv)
>> +{
> [snip]
>> +static int tcphy_get_param(struct device *dev,
>> + struct usb3phy_reg *reg,
>> + const char *name)
>> +{
>> + int ret, buffer[3];
> Shouldn't buffer be u32[3]?
>
>> +
>> + ret = of_property_read_u32_array(dev->of_node, name, buffer, 3);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + dev_err(dev, "Can not parse %s\n", name);
>> + return ret;
>> + }
> [snip]
>> diff --git a/include/linux/phy/phy-rockchip-typec.h b/include/linux/phy/phy-rockchip-typec.h
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..acdd8cb
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/include/linux/phy/phy-rockchip-typec.h
>> @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
>> +#ifndef PHY_ROCKCHIP_TYPEC_H_
>> +#define PHY_ROCKCHIP_TYPEC_H_
>> +
>> +#define PIN_MAP_A BIT(0)
>> +#define PIN_MAP_B BIT(1)
>> +#define PIN_MAP_C BIT(2)
>> +#define PIN_MAP_D BIT(3)
>> +#define PIN_MAP_E BIT(4)
>> +#define PIN_MAP_F BIT(5)
>> +
>> +#define SET_PIN_MAP(x) (((x) & 0xff) << 24)
>> +#define SET_FLIP(x) (((x) & 0xff) << 16)
>> +#define SET_DFP(x) (((x) & 0xff) << 8)
>> +#define SET_PLUGGED(x) ((x) & 0xff)
>> +#define GET_PIN_MAP(x) (((x) >> 24) & 0xff)
>> +#define GET_FLIP(x) (((x) >> 16) & 0xff)
>> +#define GET_DFP(x) (((x) >> 8) & 0xff)
>> +#define GET_PLUGGED(x) ((x) & 0xff)
> Who is the user of the definitions in this header?
The type-c phy, Dp controller and Power delivery are the user.
Power delivery set the state and send the notification
type-c phy and Dp contoller get the state.
> Best regards,
> Tomasz
>
>
>
More information about the Linux-rockchip
mailing list