On 15-03-25 05:01 PM, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:

On Thursday 26 March 2015 04:12 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:

quoted

Hi Kishon,

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 03:58:50AM +0530, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:

quoted

Hi,

On Saturday 21 March 2015 02:55 AM, Arun Ramamurthy wrote:

quoted

+struct bcm_phy_driver {
+	void __iomem *usbphy_regs;
+	void __iomem *usb2h_idm_regs;
+	void __iomem *usb2d_idm_regs;
+	struct bcm_phy_instance *ports[MAX_PHY_PORTS];

er.. can't we allocate this dynamically?

The chip has support for only 3 phys, so I believe allocating array of 3
pointers is simplest.

[...]

quoted

quoted

+
+static struct phy *bcm_usb_phy_xlate(struct device *dev,
+				     struct of_phandle_args *args)
+{
+	struct bcm_phy_driver *phy_driver = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
+	struct bcm_phy_instance *port = NULL;
+	int i;
+
+	if (!phy_driver)
+		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
+
+	if (WARN_ON(args->args_count != 1))
+		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
+
+	if (WARN_ON(args->args[0] < 0 || args->args[0] > 1))
+		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
+
+	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(phy_driver->ports); i++) {
+		struct bcm_phy_instance *p = phy_driver->ports[i];
+
+		if (p && p->generic_phy->dev.of_node == args->np) {
+			port = p;
+			break;
+		}
+	}
+
+	if (!port) {
+		dev_err(dev, "Failed to locate phy %s\n", args->np->name);
+		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
+	}
+
+	port->host_mode = args->args[0];
+
+	return port->generic_phy;
+}

The xlate function here shouldn't be needed at all. Use of_phy_simple_xlate
instead.

of_phy_simple_xlate() will not allow specifying host vs device mode when
requesting phy though...

indeed!

Kishon, to confirm , are the xlate function and the MAX_PHY_PORTS ok or 
are you recommending changes? Thanks