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;
Subject: Re: Correct ordering of phy_init and phy_power_on
To:     Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@pengutronix.de>,
        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>,
        Jules Maselbas <jmaselbas@kalray.eu>
References: <6cd01e79-fdc0-3bd4-32b5-a85142533f8a@pengutronix.de>
From:   Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@ti.com>
Message-ID: <014e75a5-ab7b-55be-e554-14ef7550b360@ti.com>
Date:   Mon, 21 Dec 2020 08:45:32 +0530
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <6cd01e79-fdc0-3bd4-32b5-a85142533f8a@pengutronix.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

On 21/12/20 4:36 am, Ahmad Fatoum wrote:
> 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?

It is intended to be ->init() and then ->power_on(). So ideally it
should be the way dwc3 is.

Thanks,
Kishon