Re: [PATCH v5 0/9] Raspberry Pi 4 USB firmware initialization rework

[Greg KH]

On Fri, Aug 14, 2020 at 12:04:05PM +0200, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-08-14 at 08:11 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 12:17:49PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> > > 
> > > On 8/13/2020 3:01 AM, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote:
> > > > Hi everyone.
> > > > 
> > > > On Mon, 2020-06-29 at 18:18 +0200, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote:
> > > > > On the Raspberry Pi 4, after a PCI reset, VL805's firmware may either be
> > > > > loaded directly from an EEPROM or, if not present, by the SoC's
> > > > > co-processor, VideoCore. This series reworks how we handle this.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The previous solution makes use of PCI quirks and exporting platform
> > > > > specific functions. Albeit functional it feels pretty shoehorned. This
> > > > > proposes an alternative way of handling the triggering of the xHCI chip
> > > > > initialization trough means of a reset controller.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The benefits are pretty evident: less platform churn in core xHCI code,
> > > > > and no explicit device dependency management in pcie-brcmstb.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Note that patch #1 depends on another series[1], that was just applied
> > > > > into the clk maintainer's tree.
> > > > > 
> > > > > The series is based on v5.8-rc3
> > > > > 
> > > > > v3: https://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg813612.html
> > > > > v2: https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/9/875
> > > > > v1: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-usb/20200608192701.18355-1-nsaenzjulienne@xxxxxxx/T/#t
> > > > > 
> > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-clk/159304773261.62212.983376627029743900@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#t
> > > > > 
> > > > > ---
> > > > 
> > > > We were waiting on a dependency to be merged upstream to get this. They are now
> > > > in, so could we move things forward?
> > > > 
> > > > I can take the device tree patches, I guess philipp can take the reset
> > > > controller code. But I'm not so sure who should be taking the PCI/USB
> > > > counterparts.
> > > 
> > > Should we route everything through the USB tree since that is where the
> > > changes that do require synchronization with other subsystems and DTS is
> > > needed the most?
> > > -- 
> > > Florian
> > 
> > That's fine with me, if everyone else is ok with it :)
> 
> Sounds good to me.

All now queued up, thanks for sticking with this!

greg k-h