Hi Heiko,
On 01/03/18 10:45, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 1. März 2018, 10:24:15 CET schrieb Enric Balletbo i Serra:
>> Right now the rockchip typec-phy does fail probing when no extcon is
>> detected. Some boards get the cable-state via the extcon interface and
>> have this supported, other boards seem to use the fusb302 chip or
>> another but the driver currently does not seem to utilize the extcon
>> interface to report the cable-state. That's required to detect
>> cable-state changes but a missing extcon shouldn't fail to probe,
>> instead, should just fall back to working in host-mode if it cannot get
>> the extcon.
>
> And of course:
> Some boards use no controller at all and just connect the type-c to a
> standard USB-A port.
>
>> Fixes: c301b327aea898af ("arm64: dts: rockchip: add usb3-phy otg-port
>> support for rk3399") Reported-by: Vicente Bergas <[email protected]>
>> Signed-off-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra <[email protected]>
>> ---
>>
>> drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-typec.c | 9 ++++++---
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-typec.c
>> b/drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-typec.c index
>> 7492c8978217..3741afab5cd2 100644
>> --- a/drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-typec.c
>> +++ b/drivers/phy/rockchip/phy-rockchip-typec.c
>> @@ -782,6 +782,9 @@ static int tcphy_get_mode(struct rockchip_typec_phy
>> *tcphy) u8 mode;
>> int ret;
>>
>> + if (!edev)
>> + return MODE_DFP_USB;
>> +
>> ufp = extcon_get_state(edev, EXTCON_USB);
>> dp = extcon_get_state(edev, EXTCON_DISP_DP);
>>
>> @@ -1115,9 +1118,9 @@ static int rockchip_typec_phy_probe(struct
>> platform_device *pdev)
>>
>> tcphy->extcon = extcon_get_edev_by_phandle(dev, 0);
>> if (IS_ERR(tcphy->extcon)) {
>> - if (PTR_ERR(tcphy->extcon) != -EPROBE_DEFER)
>> - dev_err(dev, "Invalid or missing extcon\n");
>> - return PTR_ERR(tcphy->extcon);
>> + if (PTR_ERR(tcphy->extcon) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
>> + return PTR_ERR(tcphy->extcon);
>> + tcphy->extcon = NULL;
>
> Do we want to keep a bit of the error handling of extcon, a la
>
> + if (PTR_ERR(tcphy->extcon) == -ENODEV) {
> + tcphy->extcon = NULL;
> + } else {
> + if (PTR_ERR(tcphy->extcon) != -EPROBE_DEFER)
> + dev_err(dev, "Invalid or extcon\n");
> + return PTR_ERR(tcphy->extcon);
> + }
>
> So only make it NULL, if extcon really reports ENODEV?
>
Sounds good to me, I'll send a second version ASAP, so people can test it with
that change applied.
Thanks for the feedback.
Regards,
Enric
>
> Heiko
>
