Hi, On Mon, Dec 09, 2013 at 12:43:37PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: > On Thursday 05 December 2013 01:28 PM, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > >On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 12:04:46PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: > >>On Wednesday 04 December 2013 08:10 PM, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > >>>On Mon, Nov 25, 2013 at 03:31:24PM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote: > >>>>There can be systems which does not have an external phy, so get > >>>>phy only if no quirks are added that indicates the PHY is not present. > >>>>Introduced two quirk flags to indicate the *absence* of usb2 phy and > >>>>usb3 phy. Also remove checking if return value is -ENXIO since it's now > >>>>changed to always enable usb_phy layer. > >>> > >>>Can you guys explain why is something like this needed? Like with > >>>clocks and gpios, the device drivers shouldn't need to care any more > >>>if the platform has the phys or not. -ENODEV tells you your platform > >> > >>Shouldn't we report if a particular platform needs a PHY and not able to get > >>it. How will a user know if a particular controller is not working because > >>it's > >>not able to get and initialize the PHYs? Don't you think in such cases it's > >>better to fail (and return from probe) because the controller will not work > >>anyway without the PHY? > > > >My point is that you do not need to separately tell this to the driver > >like you do with the quirks (if you did, then you would need to fix > >your framework and not hack the drivers). > > > >Like I said, ENODEV tells you that there is no phy on this platform > >for you, allowing you to safely continue. If your phy driver is not > >loaded, the framework already returns EPROBE_DEFER, right. Any other > > right. but that doesn't consider broken dt data. With quirks we'll > able to tell if a controller in a particular platform has PHY or not > without depending on the dt data.
Broken dt data? What kind of scenario are you thinking here? Do you mean case where the dt does not describe the phy on a platform that depends on it? Shouldn't that problem be fixed in the dt and not hacked in the drivers? Or are you thinking about something else? Is there a case where something like that is actually happening? Br, -- heikki -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
