Am Mittwoch, 4. November 2015, 15:46:04 schrieb Doug Anderson:

Hi,

On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Heiko Stuebner [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

This introduces a common struct that holds data belonging to
the umbrella device that contains all the phys and that we
want to use later.

Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
---
 drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++-------
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c
index dfc056b..dda1994 100644
--- a/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c
+++ b/drivers/phy/phy-rockchip-usb.c

@@ -36,9 +36,14 @@
 #define SIDDQ_ON               BIT(13)
 #define SIDDQ_OFF              (0 << 13)

+struct rockchip_usb_phy_base {
+       struct device *dev;
+       struct regmap *reg_base;
+};
+
 struct rockchip_usb_phy {
+       struct rockchip_usb_phy_base *base;
        unsigned int    reg_offset;
-       struct regmap   *reg_base;
        struct clk      *clk;
        struct phy      *phy;
 };

@@ -46,7 +51,7 @@ struct rockchip_usb_phy {
 static int rockchip_usb_phy_power(struct rockchip_usb_phy *phy,
                                           bool siddq)
 {
-       return regmap_write(phy->reg_base, phy->reg_offset,
+       return regmap_write(phy->base->reg_base, phy->reg_offset,
                            SIDDQ_WRITE_ENA | (siddq ? SIDDQ_ON : SIDDQ_OFF));
 }

@@ -101,17 +106,23 @@ static void rockchip_usb_phy_action(void *data)
 static int rockchip_usb_phy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 {
        struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
+       struct rockchip_usb_phy_base *phy_base;
        struct rockchip_usb_phy *rk_phy;
        struct phy_provider *phy_provider;
        struct device_node *child;
-       struct regmap *grf;
        unsigned int reg_offset;
        int err;

-       grf = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(dev->of_node, "rockchip,grf");
-       if (IS_ERR(grf)) {
+       phy_base = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*phy_base), GFP_KERNEL);
+       if (!phy_base)
+               return -ENOMEM;
+
+       phy_base->dev = dev;
+       phy_base->reg_base = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(dev->of_node,
+                                                            "rockchip,grf");
+       if (IS_ERR(phy_base->reg_base)) {
                dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Missing rockchip,grf property\n");
-               return PTR_ERR(grf);
+               return PTR_ERR(phy_base->reg_base);
        }

        for_each_available_child_of_node(dev->of_node, child) {

@@ -126,7 +137,6 @@ static int rockchip_usb_phy_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
                }

                rk_phy->reg_offset = reg_offset;
-               rk_phy->reg_base = grf;

I'm probably missing something, but I would have expected a line line:

  rk_phy->base = phy_base;

Otherwise how does "base" get assigned?  Ah, I see.  You forgot it in
this patch and then cheated and slipped it in in patch #3.  ;)  For
nice bisectability it probably belongs here, too...

Thanks for that catch and yep, it should definitly be here too. While
I did a compile-test for the individual steps, I guess I did not do
runtime tests for each.

I guess this is what happens when you try to separate a final work into
separate steps :-) . I'll send a revised version hopefully tomorrow.


Heiko