lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Feb]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] phy: usbphy: Add dt documentation for Broadcom Cygnus USB PHY driver


    On 15-02-18 07:15 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
    > On Tuesday 17 February 2015 13:05:50 Arun Ramamurthy wrote:
    >> On 15-02-17 12:53 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
    >>> On Tuesday 17 February 2015 12:00:49 Arun Ramamurthy wrote:
    >>>> Arnd, I patched the ehci and ohci driver to accept multiple phys so they
    >>>> require different names and cannot both be "usb". That patch was
    >>>> accepted by Alen Stern but I did not update the bindings documentation.
    >>>> I will send out another patch for that. Could we go with the naming
    >>>> scheme of "usb" + "p" + port number or do you have other suggestions?
    >>>
    >>> I don't have a good idea, but I think it would be best if the first
    >>> phy could remain named "usb" for compatibility with the existing binding.
    >>>
    >> The patch was written in a way that all the existing and new drivers can
    >> continue to use "usb" if they are using only one phy so that we remain
    >> compatible. The names need to be different only if more than one phy is
    >> specified. In such cases i don't think the first phy should be "usb" as
    >> it would be confusing to have
    >> phy-names = "usb","usbp1"
    >
    > I see your patch now, as 7e7a0e67f2c ("usb: ehci-platform: add support for
    > multiple phys per controller"), and I'm not too happy about the way you
    > did this.

    > We already concluded that there should have been a binding change
    > to go along with this, and that would have caught the fact that you
    > circumvent the API here by reading the phy names manually. That
    > part should never have made it into the kernel.
    >
    > I think we can do this either by defining specific names for the
    > phy, or by changing the generic PHY binding to allow anonymous
    > phy references (leaving out "phy-names" entirely), and adding a
    > proper API for that.
    >
    Thanks Arnd, I will wait for Alan's comments before proceeding. I am
    happy to patch the ehci-platform driver to use a new api instead of
    devm_phy_get if that is the best option.

    >> Should I run this by Alan Stern?
    >
    > I've added him to Cc here. He clearly didn't know the background about
    > the DT binding change, and should not need to, but he may have an opinion
    > on what names we should use.
    >

    >>> What is the reason for having two phys in your case? Are these
    >>> identical phy devices connected to a single controller or do they
    >>> server different purposes?
    >>>
    >> Yes, we have three identical phys connected to a single host controller
    >> and one of the phys is also connected to the device controller
    >
    > Ok, no problem with that, let's just make sure we come up with a
    > good binding for it.
    >
    > Arnd
    >


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2015-02-19 02:01    [W:2.794 / U:0.780 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site