Re: [PATCH v1 05/11] drivers: usb: twl6030: Add dt support for twl6030usb

[Rajendra Nayak]

On Tuesday 10 July 2012 11:58 AM, ABRAHAM, KISHON VIJAY wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Rajendra Nayak<rnayak@xxxxxx>  wrote:
> > On Thursday 28 June 2012 05:21 PM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> > > Add device tree support for twl6030 usb driver.
> > > Update the Documentation with device tree binding information.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Kishon Vijay Abraham I<kishon@xxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >    .../devicetree/bindings/usb/twlxxxx-usb.txt        |   18 ++++++++
> > >    drivers/usb/otg/twl6030-usb.c                      |   45
> > > ++++++++++++++------
> > >    2 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> > >    create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/twlxxxx-usb.txt
> > >
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/twlxxxx-usb.txt
> > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/twlxxxx-usb.txt
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 0000000..f293271
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/usb/twlxxxx-usb.txt
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,18 @@
> > > +USB COMPARATOR OF TWL CHIPS
> > > +
> > > +TWL6030 USB COMPARATOR
> > > + - compatible : Should be "ti,twl6030-usb"
> > > + - interrupts : Two interrupt numbers to the cpu should be specified.
> > > First
> > > +   interrupt number is the otg interrupt number that raises ID interrupts
> > > when
> > > +   the controller has to act as host and the second interrupt number is
> > > the
> > > +   usb interrupt number that raises VBUS interrupts when the controller
> > > has to
> > > +   act as device
> > > + - regulator :<supply-name>   can be "vusb" or "ldousb"
> > > + -<supply-name>-supply : phandle to the regulator device tree node
> > > +
> > > +twl6030-usb {
> > > +       compatible = "ti,twl6030-usb";
> > > +       interrupts =<   4 10>;
> > > +       regulator = "vusb";
> > > +       vusb-supply =<&vusb>;
> >
> >
> > This doesn't seem right. Why do you ned a 'regulator' string along
> > with the phandle?
>
> The original code was something like
> 	if (twl->features&  TWL6025_SUBCLASS)
> 		regulator_name = "ldousb";
> 	else
> 		regulator_name = "vusb";
>
> I wasn't sure how to handle this *TWL6025_SUBCLASS* stuff.
>
> > > +};
> > > diff --git a/drivers/usb/otg/twl6030-usb.c b/drivers/usb/otg/twl6030-usb.c
> > > index 6a361d2..20b7abe 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/usb/otg/twl6030-usb.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/usb/otg/twl6030-usb.c
> > > @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ struct twl6030_usb {
> > >          u8                      asleep;
> > >          bool                    irq_enabled;
> > >          bool                    vbus_enable;
> > > -       unsigned long           features;
> > > +       const char              *regulator;
> > >    };
> > >
> > >    #define       comparator_to_twl(x) container_of((x), struct twl6030_usb,
> > > comparator)
> > > @@ -153,13 +153,6 @@ static int twl6030_start_srp(struct phy_companion
> > > *comparator)
> > >
> > >    static int twl6030_usb_ldo_init(struct twl6030_usb *twl)
> > >    {
> > > -       char *regulator_name;
> > > -
> > > -       if (twl->features&   TWL6025_SUBCLASS)
> > >
> > > -               regulator_name = "ldousb";
> > > -       else
> > > -               regulator_name = "vusb";
> > > -
> > >          /* Set to OTG_REV 1.3 and turn on the ID_WAKEUP_COMP */
> > >          twl6030_writeb(twl, TWL6030_MODULE_ID0 , 0x1, TWL6030_BACKUP_REG);
> > >
> > > @@ -169,7 +162,7 @@ static int twl6030_usb_ldo_init(struct twl6030_usb
> > > *twl)
> > >          /* Program MISC2 register and set bit VUSB_IN_VBAT */
> > >          twl6030_writeb(twl, TWL6030_MODULE_ID0 , 0x10, TWL6030_MISC2);
> > >
> > > -       twl->usb3v3 = regulator_get(twl->dev, regulator_name);
> > > +       twl->usb3v3 = regulator_get(twl->dev, twl->regulator);
> > >          if (IS_ERR(twl->usb3v3))
> > >                  return -ENODEV;
> > >
> > > @@ -324,9 +317,9 @@ static int __devinit twl6030_usb_probe(struct
> > > platform_device *pdev)
> > >    {
> > >          struct twl6030_usb      *twl;
> > >          int                     status, err;
> > > -       struct twl4030_usb_data *pdata;
> > > -       struct device *dev =&pdev->dev;
> > >
> > > -       pdata = dev->platform_data;
> > > +       struct device_node      *np = pdev->dev.of_node;
> > > +       struct device           *dev =&pdev->dev;
> > >
> > > +       struct twl4030_usb_data *pdata = dev->platform_data;
> > >
> > >          twl = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof *twl, GFP_KERNEL);
> > >          if (!twl)
> > > @@ -335,13 +328,28 @@ static int __devinit twl6030_usb_probe(struct
> > > platform_device *pdev)
> > >          twl->dev                =&pdev->dev;
> > >
> > >          twl->irq1               = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
> > >          twl->irq2               = platform_get_irq(pdev, 1);
> > > -       twl->features           = pdata->features;
> > >          twl->linkstat           = OMAP_MUSB_UNKNOWN;
> > >
> > >          twl->comparator.set_vbus        = twl6030_set_vbus;
> > >          twl->comparator.start_srp       = twl6030_start_srp;
> > >          omap_usb2_set_comparator(&twl->comparator);
> > >
> > > +       if (np) {
> > > +               err = of_property_read_string(np,
> > > "regulator",&twl->regulator);
> > >
> > > +               if (err<   0) {
> > > +                       dev_err(&pdev->dev, "unable to get regulator\n");
> > > +                       return err;
> > > +               }
> >
> >
> > Isn't there a better way for the driver to know which supply to use instead
> > of DT passing the supply name?
>
> The problem I see is this same driver is used for twl6030 and twl6025
> and the regulator used is different for these two chips (And I think

hmm, so based on what chip is used on a board, shouldn't the board dts
file just map the right regulator with a supply name?
This doesn't look like something the driver should be bothered about.

> twl6025 will also use the same dt file as twl6030 as I don't see a
> different file for 6025).
>
> Thanks
> Kishon

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/