Re: [PATCH v3] ARM: zynq: DT: Add USB to device tree

Am 26.01.2015 um 09:23 schrieb Michal Simek:

On 01/26/2015 09:19 AM, Andreas Färber wrote:

quoted

Am 03.12.2014 um 09:39 schrieb Michal Simek:

quoted

On 12/02/2014 05:07 PM, Soren Brinkmann wrote:

quoted

Add USB nodes to zc702, zc706 and zed device trees.

Signed-off-by: Soren Brinkmann <redacted>
---
v3:
 - rename phy nodes: usb_phy -> phy0
 - rebased onto zynq/dt
v2:
 - remove '@0' from phy node name
 - don't add bogus space
---
 arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-7000.dtsi | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
 arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-zc702.dts | 11 +++++++++++
 arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-zc706.dts | 10 ++++++++++
 arch/arm/boot/dts/zynq-zed.dts   | 10 ++++++++++
 4 files changed, 51 insertions(+)

[...]

quoted

Applied to zynq/dt.

Hm, I don't see this patch in linux-next next-20150123...

And if I apply it to my -next based tree, adding corresponding nodes to
zynq-parallella.dts, I get repeatedly:

[  +0,012242] ci_hdrc ci_hdrc.0: no of_node; not parsing pinctrl DT
[  +0,000157] ci_hdrc ci_hdrc.0: ChipIdea HDRC found, lpm: 0; cap:
f090e100 op: f090e140
[  +0,000081] platform ci_hdrc.0: Driver ci_hdrc requests probe deferral
[  +0,005360] ci_hdrc ci_hdrc.1: no of_node; not parsing pinctrl DT
[  +0,000120] ci_hdrc ci_hdrc.1: ChipIdea HDRC found, lpm: 0; cap:
f0910100 op: f0910140
[  +0,001810] platform ci_hdrc.1: Driver ci_hdrc requests probe deferral

Am I missing any other patches or config options?
(I do notice that the pinctrl v3 patch that got merged has a trivial bug
for usb0, for which I'll send a patch later on.)

Why is it deferred? Is it because of pinmuxing stuff?

No, happened without as well.

Looking at a different place in dmesg, I spot this:

[  +0,003988] usb_phy_generic phy0: GPIO lookup for consumer reset-gpios
[  +0,000012] usb_phy_generic phy0: using device tree for GPIO lookup
[  +0,000015] of_get_named_gpiod_flags: can't parse 'reset-gpios-gpios'
property
 of node '/phy0[0]'
[  +0,000013] of_get_named_gpiod_flags: can't parse 'reset-gpios-gpio'
property
of node '/phy0[0]'
[  +0,000010] usb_phy_generic phy0: using lookup tables for GPIO lookup
[  +0,000153] usb_phy_generic phy0: lookup for GPIO reset-gpios failed
[  +0,000012] usb_phy_generic phy0: Error requesting RESET GPIO
[  +0,004360] usb_phy_generic: probe of phy0 failed with error -2
[  +0,004991] usb_phy_generic phy1: GPIO lookup for consumer reset-gpios
[  +0,000012] usb_phy_generic phy1: using device tree for GPIO lookup
[  +0,000013] of_get_named_gpiod_flags: can't parse 'reset-gpios-gpios'
property
 of node '/phy1[0]'
[  +0,000013] of_get_named_gpiod_flags: can't parse 'reset-gpios-gpio'
property of node '/phy1[0]'
[  +0,000010] usb_phy_generic phy1: using lookup tables for GPIO lookup
[  +0,000012] usb_phy_generic phy1: lookup for GPIO reset-gpios failed
[  +0,000011] usb_phy_generic phy1: Error requesting RESET GPIO
[  +0,004337] usb_phy_generic: probe of phy1 failed with error -2

So, I guess the chipidea driver is deferring because the phys want a
property that neither me nor you are specifying? Would that be the two
MDIO pins 52 and 53 that would need to be specified?

Regards,
Andreas

-- 
SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Jennifer Guild, Dilip Upmanyu,
Graham Norton; HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)