On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 9:33 AM Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: > > On 7/10/23 17:58, Tim Harvey wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 10, 2023 at 8:44 AM Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: > >> > >> On 7/10/23 17:26, Tim Harvey wrote: > >>> On Sat, Jul 8, 2023 at 1:55 PM Marek Vasut <ma...@denx.de> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 6/9/23 19:28, Tim Harvey wrote: > >>>>> Add support for enabling and disabling vbus-supply regulator found > >>>>> on several imx8mp boards in the usb3_phy0 and usb3_phy1 nodes. > >>>>> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Tim Harvey <thar...@gateworks.com> > >>>>> Reviewed-by: Adam Ford <aford...@gmail.com> > >>>>> --- > >>>>> v2: > >>>>> - protect ret with __maybe_unused in case CONFIG_CLK and > >>>>> CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR not defined > >>>>> - add error prints on failures > >>>>> - add Adam's rb tag > >>>>> --- > >>>>> drivers/phy/phy-imx8mq-usb.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > >>>>> 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >>>>> > >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-imx8mq-usb.c b/drivers/phy/phy-imx8mq-usb.c > >>>>> index 69f01de55538..53099436b04b 100644 > >>>>> --- a/drivers/phy/phy-imx8mq-usb.c > >>>>> +++ b/drivers/phy/phy-imx8mq-usb.c > >>>>> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ > >>>>> #include <linux/delay.h> > >>>>> #include <linux/err.h> > >>>>> #include <clk.h> > >>>>> +#include <power/regulator.h> > >>>>> > >>>>> #define PHY_CTRL0 0x0 > >>>>> #define PHY_CTRL0_REF_SSP_EN BIT(2) > >>>>> @@ -81,6 +82,7 @@ struct imx8mq_usb_phy { > >>>>> #endif > >>>>> void __iomem *base; > >>>>> enum imx8mpq_phy_type type; > >>>> > >>>> Shouldn't this be in #if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(DM_REGULATOR) ? > >>>> > >>>>> + struct udevice *vbus_supply; > >>> > >>> Hi Marek, > >>> > >>> No, the usage of it is within an 'if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(DM_REGULATOR) > >>> && imx_phy->vbus_supply)' statement > >> > >> Except if this is not ifdef'd out, the structure is larger for no good > >> reason if DM_REGULATOR is DISABLED. > > > > ok, I see your point. > > > >> > >>>>> }; > >>>>> > >>>>> static const struct udevice_id imx8mq_usb_phy_of_match[] = { > >>>>> @@ -172,10 +174,10 @@ static int imx8mq_usb_phy_power_on(struct phy > >>>>> *usb_phy) > >>>>> { > >>>>> struct udevice *dev = usb_phy->dev; > >>>>> struct imx8mq_usb_phy *imx_phy = dev_get_priv(dev); > >>>>> + __maybe_unused int ret; > >>>>> u32 value; > >>>>> > >>>>> #if CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(CLK) > >>>>> - int ret; > >>>>> ret = clk_enable(&imx_phy->phy_clk); > >>>>> if (ret) { > >>>>> printf("Failed to enable usb phy clock\n"); > >>>>> @@ -183,6 +185,14 @@ static int imx8mq_usb_phy_power_on(struct phy > >>>>> *usb_phy) > >>>>> } > >>>>> #endif > >>>>> > >>>>> + if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(DM_REGULATOR) && imx_phy->vbus_supply) { > >>>>> + ret = regulator_set_enable(imx_phy->vbus_supply, true); > >>>>> + if (ret) { > >>>>> + pr_err("Failed to enable VBUS regulator: %d\n", > >>>>> ret); > >>>> > >>>> You do need to disable clock enabled above. > >>> > >>> it does get disabled in imx8mq_usb_phy_power_off() > >> > >> If that called if power_on returns -ERRNO ? > > > > sorry, I don't quite understand. > > > > Are you asking me to add a regulator disable in a remove function to > > make sure it's disabled if removed or are you saying that I shouldn't > > return the error from regulator_set_enable from > > imx8mq_usb_phy_power_on? > > Actually, neither. There is clk_enable() a bit higher up in this > power_on function. You need to stop the clock if this > regulator_set_enable() return -ERRNO. > > >>>> This likely needs a fail path with "err: ... return ret;" > >>> > >>> there are no further conditional return paths in this function. > >> > >> I suspect there should be. > > > > again, I don't understand. The only thing remaining in this function > > is disable rx term override below so I don't see the point in adding a > > goto around that if that is what you are suggesting. > > > > I don't really know what 'rx term override' is either... perhaps the > > regulator_set_enable should go after that? > > Its only a matter of disabling the clock if the regulator enable fails > and we bail out, that's all. Does it make sense now ?
Yes - that makes sense. Thanks for explaining... not sure how I misunderstood that. You said 'clock' and I kept reading 'regulator' :) Thanks, Tim