On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 02:02:11PM -0800, David Cohen wrote:
> Hi Felipe,
>
> [snip]
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-pci.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-pci.c
> > index 8d95056..53902ea 100644
> > --- a/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-pci.c
> > +++ b/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-pci.c
> > @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
> > #include <linux/slab.h>
> > #include <linux/pci.h>
> > #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> > +#include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
> >
> > #include "platform_data.h"
> >
> > @@ -35,6 +36,24 @@
> >
> > static int dwc3_pci_quirks(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> > {
> > + if (pdev->vendor == PCI_VENDOR_ID_INTEL &&
> > + pdev->device == PCI_DEVICE_ID_INTEL_BYT) {
> > + struct gpio_desc *gpio;
> > +
> > + gpio = gpiod_get_index(&pdev->dev, "reset", 0);
> > + if (!IS_ERR(gpio)) {
> > + gpiod_direction_output(gpio, 0);
> > + gpiod_set_value_cansleep(gpio, 1);
> > + gpiod_put(gpio);
> > + }
> > + gpio = gpiod_get_index(&pdev->dev, "cs", 1);
> > + if (!IS_ERR(gpio)) {
> > + gpiod_direction_output(gpio, 0);
> > + gpiod_set_value_cansleep(gpio, 1);
> > + gpiod_put(gpio);
> > + }
> > + }
> > +
>
> A lot has been discussed in other branches of this thread.
>
> But in resume, this is the last open point to make Heikki's proposal
> good on my side. If you accept this ugly quirk (but necessary for
> current BYT-CR products when ULPI bus enumerates phy), everything seems
> good to me. If you don't accept, we need to figure out a way to get the
> platform driver code back to give gpio to phy as platform data in a way
> that it could live together with ULPI bus (BYT-CR needs the ULPI bus too).Is this needed to *all* Baytrail devices or could we have devices with updated firmware which won't need this ? I wonder if we should apply the quirk for each known product that actually needs this. Also, I will only accept the series, after I'm shown logs that it works with your known-to-be-broken device. cheers -- balbi
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
