From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 569EFC3B185 for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 08:04:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D41C208C4 for ; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 08:04:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ti.com header.i=@ti.com header.b="GX90jOJX" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727433AbgBJIEw (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Feb 2020 03:04:52 -0500 Received: from lelv0143.ext.ti.com ([198.47.23.248]:52056 "EHLO lelv0143.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725468AbgBJIEw (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Feb 2020 03:04:52 -0500 Received: from fllv0035.itg.ti.com ([10.64.41.0]) by lelv0143.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 01A84hru054895; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 02:04:43 -0600 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1581321883; bh=5RrM0zAdbPJvAvUMbbQa1uJTy6L2C1VFT9qlwKh0x6M=; h=Subject:To:CC:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=GX90jOJXYyVUI96TGzXEy/NBKYP7q6Ah/M4Hgqtz72PRIvzlwq0j/2sTNEZ6NPTBV hKmkJmRnz2eYrCrMw7JJ4Ew54cmniwfNsz7qqHii7FOK7FsNz8DUFwIE3Jloef7jrt wgvfQyG3/pyZO1vLQd5dNkuw5u+wEKXHq5WVcexM= Received: from DLEE103.ent.ti.com (dlee103.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.33]) by fllv0035.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 01A84hWu131019; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 02:04:43 -0600 Received: from DLEE106.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.36) by DLEE103.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.33) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1847.3; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 02:04:43 -0600 Received: from fllv0039.itg.ti.com (10.64.41.19) by DLEE106.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.36) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.1847.3 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 02:04:43 -0600 Received: from [10.24.69.159] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by fllv0039.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 01A84eqq071121; Mon, 10 Feb 2020 02:04:41 -0600 Subject: Re: [PATCH] phy: core: Add consumer device link support To: youling 257 CC: , , , , References: <20191104143713.11137-1-alexandre.torgue@st.com> <20200206133918.15012-1-youling257@gmail.com> <0c4a37a9-0a2e-e698-f423-53060854ea05@ti.com> From: Kishon Vijay Abraham I 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: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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 : >> 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