Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756840Ab3FAOj5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Jun 2013 10:39:57 -0400 Received: from mail-la0-f42.google.com ([209.85.215.42]:42098 "EHLO mail-la0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754772Ab3FAOjt (ORCPT ); Sat, 1 Jun 2013 10:39:49 -0400 Message-ID: <51AA07B7.4020901@cogentembedded.com> Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2013 18:39:51 +0400 From: Sergei Shtylyov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130509 Thunderbird/17.0.6 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "B, Ravi" CC: "linux-usb@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "Balbi, Felipe" Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 8/9] usb: phy: dts: Adding usbphy DT bindings for am33xx References: <1369288888-8614-1-git-send-email-ravibabu@ti.com> <1369288888-8614-9-git-send-email-ravibabu@ti.com> <519E275A.5020200@cogentembedded.com> <6C6B28D4DC342643927BEAFCE8707BF63EAE3EBF@DBDE04.ent.ti.com> <519E5D58.5020002@cogentembedded.com> <6C6B28D4DC342643927BEAFCE8707BF63EAE52A3@DBDE04.ent.ti.com> In-Reply-To: <6C6B28D4DC342643927BEAFCE8707BF63EAE52A3@DBDE04.ent.ti.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1404 Lines: 43 Hello. On 24-05-2013 9:34, B, Ravi wrote: >>>> + phy1: usbphy-gs70@44e10620 { >>>> + compatible = "ti,dsps-usbphy"; >>>> + reg = <0x44e10620 0x8 >>>> + 0x44e10648 0x4>; >>>> + reg-names = "phy_ctrl","phy_wkup"; >>>> + id = <0>; >>>> + }; >>>> + >>>> + phy2: usbphy-gs70@44e10628 { >>>> + compatible = "ti,dsps-usbphy"; >>>> + reg = <0x44e10628 0x8 >>>> + 0x44e10648 0x4>; >>> The second register conflicts with phy1. >> The two instances of phy uses common phy wakeup register. >>> That's why there is a resource conflict. Have you actually tried to instantiate the devices out of such tree? >>> This register should be declared somewhere above the PHYs I think... > I did not face any problem with this, I have tested both instances of phy used by dual instance controller, worked fine. How your /proc/iomem looks like with that? > What do you suggest, in case of common register which both phy have to use this for wakeup functionality. > The DT should support this. What do you suggest in such case? I'd probably have to create a third device for this shared register... > -- > Ravi B WBR, Sergei -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/