| Message ID | 1466509358-25498-1-git-send-email-zajec5@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
Is there any reason you are not handling this properly as a regulator with usb-nop-xceiv? Imre On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 13:42:38 +0200, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote: > There is one GPIO controlling power for both USB ports. > > Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> > --- > arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4709-netgear-r7000.dts | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4709-netgear-r7000.dts > b/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4709-netgear-r7000.dts > index a22ed14..a76486b 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4709-netgear-r7000.dts > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4709-netgear-r7000.dts > @@ -104,3 +104,11 @@ > &uart0 { > status = "okay"; > }; > + > +&usb2 { > + vcc-gpio = <&chipcommon 0 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > +}; > + > +&usb3 { > + vcc-gpio = <&chipcommon 0 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; > +};
On 21 June 2016 at 14:22, Imre Kaloz <kaloz@openwrt.org> wrote: > Is there any reason you are not handling this properly as a regulator with > usb-nop-xceiv? We can't use USB NOP PHY as we need a specific PHY driver for Broadcom's USB. I sent patch for this: https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9148097/
On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:26:11 +0200, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote: > On 21 June 2016 at 14:22, Imre Kaloz <kaloz@openwrt.org> wrote: >> Is there any reason you are not handling this properly as a regulator >> with >> usb-nop-xceiv? > > We can't use USB NOP PHY as we need a specific PHY driver for Broadcom's > USB. I see. That shouldn't stop you from addressing the regulator part, tho ;) Imre
On 21 June 2016 at 16:29, Imre Kaloz <kaloz@openwrt.org> wrote: > On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:26:11 +0200, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 21 June 2016 at 14:22, Imre Kaloz <kaloz@openwrt.org> wrote: >>> >>> Is there any reason you are not handling this properly as a regulator >>> with >>> usb-nop-xceiv? >> >> >> We can't use USB NOP PHY as we need a specific PHY driver for Broadcom's >> USB. > > > I see. That shouldn't stop you from addressing the regulator part, tho ;) How? Be more specific please.
On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 17:23:18 +0200, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote: > On 21 June 2016 at 16:29, Imre Kaloz <kaloz@openwrt.org> wrote: >> On Tue, 21 Jun 2016 14:26:11 +0200, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On 21 June 2016 at 14:22, Imre Kaloz <kaloz@openwrt.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> Is there any reason you are not handling this properly as a regulator >>>> with >>>> usb-nop-xceiv? >>> >>> >>> We can't use USB NOP PHY as we need a specific PHY driver for >>> Broadcom's >>> USB. >> >> >> I see. That shouldn't stop you from addressing the regulator part, tho >> ;) > > How? Be more specific please. > Instead of blindly enabling a GPIO, you should define that GPIO line as a fixed regulator and make the USB phy driver handle it. Take a look at http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=7776ab70d75ff9857343e44e428744d81c30ce1b for example. Imre
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4709-netgear-r7000.dts b/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4709-netgear-r7000.dts index a22ed14..a76486b 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4709-netgear-r7000.dts +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4709-netgear-r7000.dts @@ -104,3 +104,11 @@ &uart0 { status = "okay"; }; + +&usb2 { + vcc-gpio = <&chipcommon 0 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; +}; + +&usb3 { + vcc-gpio = <&chipcommon 0 GPIO_ACTIVE_HIGH>; +};
There is one GPIO controlling power for both USB ports. Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> --- arch/arm/boot/dts/bcm4709-netgear-r7000.dts | 8 ++++++++ 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)