Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH] phy: core: Add consumer device link support
To:     youling 257 <youling257@gmail.com>
CC:     <alexandre.torgue@st.com>, <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@renesas.com>,
        <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20191104143713.11137-1-alexandre.torgue@st.com>
 <20200206133918.15012-1-youling257@gmail.com>
 <0c4a37a9-0a2e-e698-f423-53060854ea05@ti.com>
 <CAOzgRdb5QfJDQzbtoHQry4wxUg52LwX5XFCPzzaYa=z+RqNWOQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com>
Message-ID: <8bd72269-16ae-b24a-7144-44d22d668dc6@ti.com>
Date:   Mon, 10 Feb 2020 13:38:16 +0530
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAOzgRdb5QfJDQzbtoHQry4wxUg52LwX5XFCPzzaYa=z+RqNWOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Alexandre,

On 07/02/20 12:27 PM, youling 257 wrote:
> test this diff, dwc3 work for my device, thanks.
> 
> 2020-02-07 13:16 GMT+08:00, Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com>:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 06/02/20 7:09 PM, youling257 wrote:
>>> This patch cause "dwc3 dwc3.3.auto: failed to create device link to
>>> dwc3.3.auto.ulpi" problem.
>>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206435
>>
>> I'm suspecting there is some sort of reverse dependency with dwc3 ULPI.
>> Can you try the following diff?
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/phy/phy-core.c b/drivers/phy/phy-core.c
>> index 2eb28cc2d2dc..397311dcb116 100644
>> --- a/drivers/phy/phy-core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/phy/phy-core.c
>> @@ -687,7 +687,7 @@ struct phy *phy_get(struct device *dev, const char
>> *string)
>>
>>         get_device(&phy->dev);
>>
>> -       link = device_link_add(dev, &phy->dev, DL_FLAG_STATELESS);
>> +       link = device_link_add(dev, &phy->dev, DL_FLAG_SYNC_STATE_ONLY);
>>         if (!link) {
>>                 dev_err(dev, "failed to create device link to %s\n",
>>                         dev_name(phy->dev.parent));
>> @@ -802,7 +802,7 @@ struct phy *devm_of_phy_get(struct device *dev,
>> struct device_node *np,
>>                 return phy;
>>         }
>>
>> -       link = device_link_add(dev, &phy->dev, DL_FLAG_STATELESS);
>> +       link = device_link_add(dev, &phy->dev, DL_FLAG_SYNC_STATE_ONLY);
>>         if (!link) {
>>                 dev_err(dev, "failed to create device link to %s\n",
>>                         dev_name(phy->dev.parent));
>> @@ -851,7 +851,7 @@ struct phy *devm_of_phy_get_by_index(struct device
>> *dev, struct device_node *np,
>>         *ptr = phy;
>>         devres_add(dev, ptr);
>>
>> -       link = device_link_add(dev, &phy->dev, DL_FLAG_STATELESS);
>> +       link = device_link_add(dev, &phy->dev, DL_FLAG_SYNC_STATE_ONLY);
>>         if (!link) {
>>                 dev_err(dev, "failed to create device link to %s\n",
>>                         dev_name(phy->dev.parent));Parent

Can you check if this doesn't affect the suspend/resume ordering?

Thanks
Kishon