Re: [PATCH v5 23/23] phy: Add support for Qualcomm's USB HS phy

[Peter Chen]

On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 12:33:43PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Peter Chen (2016-10-20 19:20:30)
> > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 04:20:38PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > > Quoting Stephen Boyd (2016-10-17 18:56:36)
> > > > +
> > > > +static int
> > > > +qcom_usb_hs_phy_vbus_notifier(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long event,
> > > > +                             void *ptr)
> > > > +{
> > > > +       struct qcom_usb_hs_phy *uphy;
> > > > +       int is_host;
> > > > +       u8 addr;
> > > > +
> > > > +       uphy = container_of(nb, struct qcom_usb_hs_phy, vbus_notify);
> > > > +       is_host = extcon_get_cable_state_(uphy->id_edev, EXTCON_USB_HOST);
> > > 
> > > Please don't apply this patch. This call now deadlocks on v4.9-rc1
> > > because of how extcon_get_cable_state_() now grabs a lock that is
> > > already held here when we're inside the notifier. It's not really
> > > required that we grab the lock in extcon there, but this has exposed a
> > > flaw in the logic anyway. We don't know if the id pin is going to toggle
> > > before or after this function is called, so we should really keep track
> > > of both vbus and id state in this driver and then do the same ulpi
> > > writes from two different notifiers for both vbus and id pin. We would
> > > be duplicating work sometimes, but that's pretty much the best solution
> > > I can come up with. Otherwise it's racy.
> > > 
> > 
> > Why you need to care id status? If EXTCON_USB event has happened, and
> > event is true, you can set, otherwise, it is clear operation, that's
> > to say you may not need have id extcon phandle, do you think so?
> > 
> 
> I need to add a comment to the code here because I forgot what was going
> on.
> 
> Either way, this code is pulling D+ up when we're in device mode. We
> don't want to do the pullup if we're a host, and vbus extcon only tells
> us if the cable is attached so we can't just rely on that one bit of
> information.
> 
> I suppose that's not really appropriate to do via extcon though in the
> phy driver though, so I'm thinking that it should be rewritten to use
> the phy_set_mode() feature of the phy framework. Basically,
> ci_udc_pullup() will call phy_set_mode() with PHY_MODE_USB_DEVICE or
> PHY_MODE_USB_HOST and then we can set or clear these bits in the ulpi
> register space. I think that will make things simpler here and things
> like soft-connect will work better. Sound good?

I agree with you, and you may notify controller role through
phy_set_mode at the controller probe and role switch routine.

-- 

Best Regards,
Peter Chen