Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>
Subject: Correct ordering of phy_init and phy_power_on
To:     Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com>,
        Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
        Minas Harutyunyan <hminas@synopsys.com>,
        linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
Cc:     "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
        linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, Jules Maselbas <jmaselbas@kalray.eu>
Message-ID: <6cd01e79-fdc0-3bd4-32b5-a85142533f8a@pengutronix.de>
Date:   Mon, 21 Dec 2020 00:06:39 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hello,

I just noticed that USB controller drivers differ in the order in which they
do phy_init and phy_power_on. For example:

__dwc2_lowlevel_hw_enable():

	ret = phy_power_on(hsotg->phy);    
	if (ret == 0)                      
        	ret = phy_init(hsotg->phy);

dwc3_core_init():

	ret = dwc3_core_soft_reset(dwc); // internally does phy_init(dwc->usb2_generic_phy);
	/* [snip] */
	ret = phy_power_on(dwc->usb2_generic_phy);


My initial assumption has been init -> power_on, but at least the phy-stm32-usbphyc
(used with dwc2) is written with the assumption that exit -> power_off (and therefore
power_on -> init). If they are swapped, disabling fails.

So how was it meant to be?

Cheers,
Ahmad

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Steuerwalder Str. 21                       | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany                  | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |