Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 5 Dec 2022 11:28:09 +0900
From:   Jung Daehwan <dh10.jung@samsung.com>
To:     Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
        Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@intel.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@gmail.com>,
        Artur Bujdoso <artur.bujdoso@gmail.com>,
        Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
        Tomer Maimon <tmaimon77@gmail.com>,
        "open list:USB SUBSYSTEM" <linux-usb@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" 
        <devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/SAMSUNG S3C, S5P AND EXYNOS ARM ARCHITECTURES" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        "open list:ARM/SAMSUNG S3C, S5P AND EXYNOS ARM ARCHITECTURES" 
        <linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org>,
        open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, sc.suh@samsung.com,
        taehyun.cho@samsung.com, jh0801.jung@samsung.com,
        eomji.oh@samsung.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v1 2/2] usb: host: add xhci-exynos to support Exynos
 SOCs
Message-ID: <20221205022809.GC54922@ubuntu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <ec0ce90c-b165-d84f-340d-4973b65609b3@linux.intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30)
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
        boundary="----3fo7lev8HRxwEdfRbJiPjGY7XcYF58l8nMiK-NSEDm8eBp4M=_1539a_"
CMS-TYPE: 102P
DLP-Filter: Pass
References: <1669860811-171746-1-git-send-email-dh10.jung@samsung.com>
        <CGME20221201021942epcas2p2429ed37e1f6146b6e1a5bef23141b3f7@epcas2p2.samsung.com>
        <1669860811-171746-3-git-send-email-dh10.jung@samsung.com>
        <Y4hgnxGMEuizJumr@kroah.com>
        <c524cba6-4438-461a-ab05-9325fe09f832@app.fastmail.com>
        <ec0ce90c-b165-d84f-340d-4973b65609b3@linux.intel.com>
Precedence: bulk

------3fo7lev8HRxwEdfRbJiPjGY7XcYF58l8nMiK-NSEDm8eBp4M=_1539a_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline

On Fri, Dec 02, 2022 at 02:22:39PM +0200, Mathias Nyman wrote:
> On 1.12.2022 11.01, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> >On Thu, Dec 1, 2022, at 09:06, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> >>On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 11:13:31AM +0900, Daehwan Jung wrote:
> >>>This driver works with xhci platform driver. It needs to override
> >>>functions of xhci_plat_hc_driver. Wakelocks are used for sleep/wakeup
> >>>scenario of system.
> >>
> >>So this means that no other platform xhci driver can be supported in the
> >>same system at the same time.
> >>
> >>Which kind of makes sense as that's not anything a normal system would
> >>have, BUT it feels very odd.  This whole idea of "override the platform
> >>driver" feels fragile, why not make these just real platform drivers and
> >>have the xhci platform code be a library that the other ones can use?
> >>That way you have more control overall, right?
> 
> Agree that overriding the generic platform driver xhci_hc_platform_driver
> from this exynos driver is odd.
> 
> But I don't understand how this works.
> Where are the hcds created and added when this xhci-exonys driver binds to
> the device? all this driver does in probe is the overriding?
> 
> Am I missing something here?
> 

This works mainly with xhci platform driver. But xhci-exynos needs to override
some funtions. xhci-exynos probes first with override own functons and
it works with xhci platform driver.

> >
> >Agreed, having another layer here (hcd -> xhci -> xhcd_platform ->
> >xhcd_exynos) would fit perfectly well into how other SoC specific
> >drivers are abstracted. This could potentially also help reduce
> >the amount of code duplication between other soc specific variants
> >(mtk, tegra, mvebu, ...) that are all platform drivers but don't
> >share code with xhci-plat.c.
> >
> >Alternatively, it seems that all of the xhci-exynos support could
> >just be part of the generic xhci-platform driver: as far as I can
> >tell, none of the added code is exynos specific at all, instead it
> >is a generic xhci that is using the wakeup_source framework.
> 
> Sounds reasonable as well, and if some exynos specific code is needed
> then just create a xhci_plat_priv struct for exynos and pass it in
> of_device_id data like other vendors that use the generic
> xhci-platform driver do.
> 

I considered using existing overrides like xhci_plat_priv but I couldn't
find a solution. My driver invokes probing xhci platform driver in
source code not device tree. Allocation of platform device is done
in dwc3_host_init(usb/dwc3/host.c). That's why I can't pass device data
to xhci platform driver.

> -Mathias
> 
> 

------3fo7lev8HRxwEdfRbJiPjGY7XcYF58l8nMiK-NSEDm8eBp4M=_1539a_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"


------3fo7lev8HRxwEdfRbJiPjGY7XcYF58l8nMiK-NSEDm8eBp4M=_1539a_--